Prognosis and reproducibility of new and existing binary grading systems for endometrial carcinoma comparedto FIGO grading in hysterectomy specimens

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 654-660

  Guan, Hui ^a   Semaan, Assaad ^a   Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna ^a   Arabi, Haitham ^a   Feng, Jining ^a   Fathallah, Lamia ^b   Pansare, Vaishali ^c   Qazi, Aamer ^a   Abdul Karim, Fadi ^d   Morris, Robert T ^a   Munkarah, Adnan R ^e   Ali Fehmi, Rouba ^a  

^a WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b ST JOHN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^c Beaumont Hospital   (United States)

^d CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Endometrial carcinoma; FIGO; Grade; Prognostic power; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL NUCLEUS; CELL STRUCTURE; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; HYSTERECTOMY; INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS GRADING SYSTEM; INTEROBSERVER VARIATION; INTRAOBSERVER VARIATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; TUMOR CELL; TUMOR NECROSIS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CARCINOMA; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OBSTETRICAL AND GYNECOLOGICAL; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPECIMEN HANDLING; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80051880523     PISSN: 1048891X     EISSN: 15251438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31821454f1     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M, et al. (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2007. National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD. Available at http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/ 1975-2007/. Accessed February 23, 2011.
2. Ng AB, Reagan JW. Incidence and prognosis of endometrial carcinoma by histologic grade and extent. Obstet Gynecol. 1970;35:437-443.
3. Sutton GP, Geisler HE, Stehman FB, et al. Features associated with survival and disease-free survival in early endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;160:1385-1391; discussion 91-3.
4. Homesley HD, Zaino R. Endometrial cancer: prognostic factors. Semin Oncol. 1994;21:71-78. (Pubitemid 24060842)
5. Taylor RR, Zeller J, Lieberman RW, et al. An analysis of two versus three grades for endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;74:3-6. (Pubitemid 29331160)
6. Lax SF, Kurman RJ, Pizer ES, et al. A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000; 24:1201-1208.
7. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, et al. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer. 1987;60:2035-2041. (Pubitemid 17145924)
8. Nedergaard L, Jacobsen M, Andersen JE. Interobserver agreement for tumour type, grade of differentiation and stage in endometrial carcinomas. APMIS. 1995;103:511-518.
9. Zaino RJ, Kurman RJ, Diana KL, et al. Pathologic models to predict outcome for women with endometrial adenocarcinoma: the importance of the distinction between surgical stage and clinical stageVa Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer. 1996;77:1115-1121. (Pubitemid 26080902)
10. Alkushi A, Abdul-Rahman ZH, Lim P, et al. Description of a novel system for grading of endometrial carcinoma and comparison with existing grading systems. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:295-304. (Pubitemid 40321964)
11. Zaino RJ, Kurman RJ, Diana KL, et al. The utility of the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics histologic grading of endometrial adenocarcinoma using a defined nuclear grading system. A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer. 1995;75:81-86.
12. Zaino RJ, Silverberg SG, Norris HJ, et al. The prognostic value of nuclear versus architectural grading in endometrial adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1994;13:29-36. (Pubitemid 24006331)
13. Cramer SF, Roth LM, Ulbright TM, et al. Evaluation of the reproducibility of the World Health Organization classification of common ovarian cancers. With emphasis on methodology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1987;111:819-829. (Pubitemid 17121987)
14. Silcocks P. Measuring repeatability and validity of histological diagnosisVa brief review with some practical examples. J Clin Pathol. 1983;36:1269-1275. (Pubitemid 14205410)
15. Nielsen AL, Thomsen HK, Nyholm HC. Evaluation of the reproducibility of the revised 1988 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grading system of endometrial cancers with special emphasis on nuclear grading. Cancer. 1991;68:2303-2309.
16. Mittal KR, Barwick KW. Diffusely infiltrating adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. A subtype with poor prognosis. Am J Surg Pathol. 1988;12:754-758.
17. Mittal KR, Schwartz PE, Barwick KW. Architectural (FIGO) grading, nuclear grading, and other prognostic indicators in stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma with identification of high-risk and low-risk groups. Cancer. 1988;61:538-545. (Pubitemid 18039369)
18. Scholten AN, Smit VT, Beerman H, et al. Prognostic significance and interobserver variability of histologic grading systems for endometrial carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;100:764-772. (Pubitemid 38176855)
19. Christopherson WM, Alberhasky RC, Connelly PJ. Carcinoma of the endometrium. II. Papillary adenocarcinoma: a clinical pathological study, 46 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1982;77: 534-540. (Pubitemid 12112396)
20. Hachisuga T, Kawarabayashi T, Iwasaka T, et al. The prognostic value of semiquantitative nuclear grading in endometrial carcinomas. Gynecol Oncol. 1997;65:115-120. (Pubitemid 27171561)
21. Nordstrom B, Strang P, Bergstrom R, et al. A comparison of proliferation markers and their prognostic value for women with endometrial carcinoma. Ki-67, proliferating cell nuclear antigen, and flow cytometric S-phase fraction. Cancer. 1996;78:1942-1951.
22. Geisler JP, Wiemann MC, Zhou Z, et al. Proliferation index determined by MIB-1 and recurrence in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1996;61:373-377. (Pubitemid 26170013)
23. Ioffe OB, Papadimitriou JC, Drachenberg CB. Correlation of proliferation indices, apoptosis, and related oncogene expression (bcl-2 and c-erbB-2) and p53 in proliferative, hyperplastic, and malignant endometrium. Hum Pathol. 1998;29:1150-1159. (Pubitemid 28467539)