Nuclear atypia grading score is a useful prognostic factor in papillary gastric adenocarcinoma

Histopathology

Volumn 59, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 841-849

  Nakashima, Yuichiro ^a   Yao, Takashi ^b   Hirahashi, Minako ^a   Aishima, Shinichi ^a   Kakeji, Yoshihiro ^a   Maehara, Yoshihiko ^a   Tsuneyoshi, Masazumi ^a  

^a KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b JUNTENDO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

DNA ploidy; Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2); Nuclear atypia; P53; Papillary gastric adenocarcinoma

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; KI 67 ANTIGEN; MUCIN; PROTEIN P53;

ADVANCED CANCER; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; IMMUNOCHEMISTRY; LASER SCANNING CYTOMETRY; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR ATYPIA GRADING SCORE; PAPILLARY GASTRIC ADENOCARCINOMA; PLOIDY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; STOMACH ADENOCARCINOMA;

ADENOCARCINOMA, PAPILLARY; AGED; CELL NUCLEUS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; LASER SCANNING CYTOMETRY; MALE; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PLOIDIES; PROGNOSIS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; STOMACH NEOPLASMS; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 81555209825     PISSN: 03090167     EISSN: 13652559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.04035.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Hirota T, Ochiai A, Itabashi M et al. Significance of histological type of gastric carcinoma as a prognostic factor. Stomach Intestine 1991; 26; 1149-1158. [in Japanese].
2. Koseki K, Takizawa T, Koike M et al. Distinction of differentiated type early gastric carcinoma with gastric type mucin expression. Cancer 2000; 89; 724-732.
3. Yasuda K, Adachi Y, Shiraishi N et al. Papillary adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Gastric Cancer 2000; 3; 33-38.
4. Ito E, Takizawa T. Differentiated adenocarcinoma of the gastric and intestinal phenotype - histological appearance and biological behavior. Stomach Intestine 2003; 38; 701-706. [in Japanese].
5. Kawachi H, Takizawa T, Horiguchi S et al. Pathological diagnosis and biological behavior of gastric papillary adenocarcinoma. Pathol. Clin. Med. 2005; 23; 960-965. [in Japanese].
6. Hamilton SR, Aaltonen LA eds. World Health Organization classification of tumors - pathology and genetics of tumors of the digestive system. Lyon: IARC Press, 2000; 43.
7. Watanabe H. Pathological grading of malignancy of gastrointestinal carcinomas. Pathol. Clin. Med. 2005; 23; 932-943. [in Japanese].
8. Bundgaard T, Sorensen FB, Gaihede M et al. Stereologic, histopathologic, flow cytometric, and clinical parameters in the prognostic evaluation of 74 patients with intraoral squamous cell carcinomas. Cancer 1992; 70; 1-13.
9. Mitmaker B, Begin LR, Gordon PH. Nuclear shape as a prognostic discriminant in colorectal carcinoma. Dis. Colon Rectum 1991; 34; 249-259.
10. Pienta KJ, Coffey DS. Correlation of nuclear morphometry with progression of breast cancer. Cancer 1991; 68; 2012-2016.
11. Tosi P, Luzi P, Baak JP et al. Nuclear morphometry as an important prognostic factor in stage I renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 1986; 58; 2512-2518.
12. Ikeguchi M, Oka S, Saito H et al. Computerized nuclear morphometry a new morphologic assessment for advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann. Surg. 1999; 299; 55-61.
13. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma, 2nd English edn. Gastric. Cancer 1998; 1; 10-24.
14. Sasaki A, Kitadai Y, Ito M et al. Mucin phenotype and background mucosa of intramucosal differentiated-type adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Oncology 2004; 66; 379-387.
15. Kim MA, Jung EJ, Lee HS et al. Evaluation of HER-2 gene status in gastric carcinoma using immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Hum. Pathol. 2007; 38; 1386-1393.
16. Hiddemann W, Schumann J, Andreef M et al. Convention on nomenclature for DNA cytometry. Committee on Nomenclature, Society for Analytical Cytology. Cancer Genet. Cytogenet. 1984; 13; 181-183.
17. Tsuda H, Akiyama F, Kurosumi M et al. Establishment of histological criteria for high-risk node-negative breast carcinoma for a multi-institutional randomized clinical trial of adjuvant therapy. Japan National Surgical Adjuvant Study of Breast Cancer (NSAS-BC) Pathology Section. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 1998; 28; 486-491.
18. Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1982; 6; 655-663.
19. 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.
20. Reed W, Hannisdal E, Boehler PJ et al. The prognostic value of p53 and c-erb B-2 immunostaining is overrated for patients with lymph node negative breast carcinoma: a multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in 613 patients with a follow-up of 14-30years. Cancer 2000; 88; 804-813.
21. Rudolph P, Olsson H, Bonatz G et al. Correlation between p53, c-erbB-2, and topoisomerase II alpha expression, DNA ploidy, hormonal receptor status and proliferation in 356 node-negative breast carcinomas: prognostic implications. J. Pathol. 1999; 187; 207-216.
22. Tsuda H. Individualization of breast cancer based on histopathological features and molecular alterations. Breast Cancer 2008; 15; 121-132.
23. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD et al. Progress and promise: highlights of the international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2007. Ann. Oncol. 2007; 18; 1133-1144.
24. Chiusa L, Margaria E, Pich A. Nuclear morphometry in male breast carcinoma: association with cell proliferative activity, oncogene expression, DNA content and prognosis. Int. J. Cancer 2000; 89; 494-499.
25. Sorbe B, Risberg B. Prognostic importance of the nuclear proteins p53 and Rb in conjunction with DNA, nuclear morphometry and grading in endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 1997; 7; 34-41.
26. Furuya T, Uchiyama T, Murakami T et al. Relationship between chromosomal instability and intratumoral regional DNA ploidy heterogeneity in primary gastric cancers. Clin. Cancer Res. 2000; 6; 2815-2820.
27. Furuya T, Uchiyama T, Adachi A et al. Relation of DNA ploidy to genetic aberrations detected by chromosomal CGH and FISH in gastric adenocarcinomas. Oncol. Rep. 2006; 15; 1491-1496.
28. Oga A, Kong G, Ishii Y et al. Preferential loss of 5q14-21 in intestinal-type gastric cancer with DNA aneuploidy. Cytometry 2001; 46; 57-62.
29. Carder P, Wyllie AH, Purdie CA et al. Stabilised p53 facilitates aneuploid clonal divergence in colorectal cancer. Oncogene 1993; 8; 1397-1401.
30. Berger MS, Locher GW, Saurer S et al. Correlation of c-erbB-2 gene amplification and protein expression in human breast carcinoma with nodal status and nuclear grading. Cancer Res. 1988; 48; 1238-1243.
31. Van Cutsem E, Kang Y, Chung H et al. Efficacy results from the ToGA trial: a phase III study of trastuzumab added to standard chemotherapy (CT) in first-line human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced gastric cancer (GC). J. Clin. Oncol. 2009; 27; Abstract LBA4509.