A nuclear grading system is a strong predictor of survival in epitheloid diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma

Modern Pathology

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 260-271

  Kadota, Kyuichi ^a,b   Suzuki, Kei ^a   Colovos, Christos ^a   Sima, Camelia S ^a   Rusch, Valerie W ^a   Travis, William D ^a   Adusumilli, Prasad S ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b KAGAWA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

epithelioid mesothelioma; MIB 1; mitosis; nuclear atypia; nuclear grade; survival

Indexed keywords

KI 67 ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL NUCLEUS; CELL NUCLEUS INCLUSION BODY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; LABELING INDEX; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MALIGNANT MESOTHELIOMA; MITOSIS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NUCLEOLUS; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PLEURA MESOTHELIOMA; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; TISSUE MICROARRAY; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTIBODIES, ANTINUCLEAR; ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL; CELL NUCLEUS; EPITHELIOID CELLS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MESOTHELIOMA; MIDDLE AGED; MITOTIC INDEX; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PLEURAL NEOPLASMS; PROGNOSIS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; TISSUE ARRAY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84856529768     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: 15300285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2011.146     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Churg A, Cagle PT, Roggli VL. Tumors of the Serosal Membranes, Series IV edn Vol., American Registry of Pathology: Washington DC, 2006;33-72 pp.
2. Robinson BWS, Lake RA. Advances in malignant mesothelioma. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1591-1603. (Pubitemid 41434638)
3. Sugarbaker DJ, Flores RM, Jaklitsch MT, et al. Resection margins, extrapleural nodal status, and cell type determine postoperative long-term survival in trimodality therapy of malignant pleural mesothelioma: results of 183 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;117:54-65. (Pubitemid 29022249)
4. Rusch VW, Venkatraman ES. Important prognostic factors in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, managed surgically. Ann Thorac Surg 1999; 68:1799-1804.
5. Flores RM, Zakowski M, Venkatraman E, et al. Prognostic factors in the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma at a large tertiary referral center. J Thorac Oncol 2007;2:957-965. (Pubitemid 47511601)
6. Arrossi AV, Lin E, Rice D, Moran CA. Histologic assessment and prognostic factors of malignant pleural mesothelioma treated with extrapleural pneumonectomy. Am J Clin Pathol 2008;130:754-764.
7. Curran D, Sahmoud T, Therasse P, et al. Prognostic factors in patients with pleural mesothelioma: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer experience. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:145-152. (Pubitemid 28041592)
8. Borasio P, Berruti A, Bille A, et al. Malignant pleural mesothelioma: clinicopathologic and survival characteristics in a consecutive series of 394 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008;33:307-313.
9. Ak G, Metintas S, Metintas M, et al. Prognostic factors according to the treatment schedule in malignant pleural mesothelioma. J Thorac Oncol 2009;4: 1425-1430.
10. Meyer JS, Alvarez C, Milikowski C, et al. Breast carcinoma malignancy grading by Bloom-Richardson system vs proliferation index: reproducibility of grade and advantages of proliferation index. Mod Pathol 2005;18:1067-1078. (Pubitemid 41224497)
11. Thomas JS, Kerr GR, Jack WJ, et al. Histological grading of invasive breast carcinoma-a simplification of existing methods in a large conservation series with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 2009;55:724-731.
12. Delahunt B. Advances and controversies in grading and staging of renal cell carcinoma. Mod Pathol 2009;22(Suppl 2):S24-S36.
13. Rioux-Leclercq N, Karakiewicz PI, Trinh QD, et al. Prognostic ability of simplified nuclear grading of renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 2007;109:868-874. (Pubitemid 46333528)
14. Epstein JI. The new World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology classification for TA, T1 bladder tumors: is it an improvement? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2003;47:83-89.
15. Lipponen PK, Eskelinen MJ, Jauhiainen K, et al. Independent clinical, histological and quantitative prognostic factors in transitional-cell bladder tumours, with special reference to mitotic frequency. Int J Cancer 1992;51:396-403.
16. Cina SJ, Lancaster-Weiss KJ, Lecksell K, Epstein JI. Correlation of Ki-67 and p53 with the new World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology Classification System for Urothelial Neoplasia. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001;125:646-651. (Pubitemid 32429812)
17. Yang Q, Mori I, Sakurai T, et al. Correlation between nuclear grade and biological prognostic variables in invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2001;8:105-110.
18. Greene F, Page D, Fleming I, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edn, Vol. Springer: New York, 2002; 207-208 pp.
19. Craighead JE, Abraham JL, Churg A, et al. The pathology of asbestos-associated diseases of the lungs and pleural cavities: diagnostic criteria and proposed grading schema. Report of the pneumoconiosis committee of the college of American pathologists and the national institute for occupational safety and health. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1982;106:544-596.
20. Travis W, Brambilla E, Muller-Hermelink H, Harris C. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics. Tumours of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus, and Heart. IARC Press: Lyon, France, 2004;125-144 pp.
21. Van Diest PJ, van der Wall E, Baak JP. Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review. J Clin Pathol 2004;57:675-681. (Pubitemid 38901478)
22. Travis WD, RushW, Flieder DB, et al. Survival analysis of 200 pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors with clarification of criteria for atypical carcinoid and its separation from typical carcinoid. Am J Surg Pathol 1998;22:934-944. (Pubitemid 28364493)
23. Barletta JA, Yeap BY, Chirieac LR. Prognostic significance of grading in lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer 2010;116:659-669.
24. Baak JP. Mitosis counting in tumors. Hum Pathol 1990;21:683-685. (Pubitemid 20216807)
25. Okudela K, Woo T, Mitsui H, et al. Morphometric profiling of lung cancers. Its association with clinicopathologic, biologic, and molecular genetic features. Am J Surg Pathol 2010;34:243-255.
26. Maezawa N, Tsuta K, Shibuki Y, et al. Cytopathologic factors can predict invasion in small-sized peripheral lung adenocarcinoma with a bronchioloalveolar carcinoma component. Cancer 2006;108:488-493. (Pubitemid 46076969)
27. Cerruto CA, Brun EA, Chang D, et al. Prognostic significance of histomorphologic parameters in diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006;130:1654-1661. (Pubitemid 44683793)
28. Thompson LD. Pheochromocytoma of the Adrenal gland Scaled Score (PASS) to separate benign from malignant neoplasms: a clinicopathologic and immunophenotypic study of 100 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:551-566. (Pubitemid 34438716)
29. Kadota K, Suzuki K, Sima CS, et al. Pleomorphic epithelioid diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma: a clinicopathological review and conceptual proposal to reclassify as biphasic or sarcomatoid mesothelioma. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:896-904.
30. Heller G, Venkatraman E. A nonparametric test to compare survival distributions with covariate adjustment. JRSS-B 2004;66:719-733 . (Pubitemid 39015909)
31. Genega EM, Kapali M, Torres-Quinones M, et al. Impact of the 1998 World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology classification system for urothelial neoplasms of the kidney. Mod Pathol 2005;18:11-18.
32. Nakazato Y, Minami Y, Kobayashi H, et al. Nuclear grading of primary pulmonary adenocarcinomas: correlation between nuclear size and prognosis. Cancer 2010;116:2011-2019.
33. Bignold LP. Pathogenetic mechanisms of nuclear pleomorphism of tumour cells based on the mutator phenotype theory of carcinogenesis. Histol Histopathol 2003;18:657-664. (Pubitemid 36362082)
34. Kobayashi Y, Yokose T, Kawamura K, et al. Cytologic factors associated with prognosis in patients with peripheral adenocarcinoma of the lung measuring 3. cm or less in greatest dimension. Cancer 2005; 105:44-51. (Pubitemid 40321482)
35. Poleri C, Morero JL, Nieva B, et al. Risk of recurrence in patients with surgically resected stage I non-small cell lung carcinoma: histopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis. Chest 2003;123:1858-1867. (Pubitemid 36706705)
36. Guillou L, Coindre JM, Bonichon F, et al. Comparative study of the National Cancer Institute and French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group grading systems in a population of 410 adult patients with soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:350-362. (Pubitemid 27020593)
37. Hasegawa T, Yokoyama R, Matsuno Y, et al. Prognostic significance of histologic grade and nuclear expression of beta-catenin in synovial sarcoma. Hum Pathol 2001;32:257-263. (Pubitemid 32246798)
38. Rudolph P, Gloeckner K, Parwaresch R, et al. Immunophenotype, proliferation, DNA ploidy, and biological behavior of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a multivariate clinicopathologic study. Hum Pathol 1998;29:791-800. (Pubitemid 28375984)
39. Beer TW, Buchanan R, Matthews AW, et al. Prognosis in malignant mesothelioma related to MIB 1 proliferation index and histological subtype. Hum Pathol 1998;29:246-251. (Pubitemid 28123921)
40. Comin CE, Anichini C, Boddi V, et al. MIB-1 proliferation index correlates with survival in pleural malignant mesothelioma. Histopathology 2000;36:26-31. (Pubitemid 30055419)
41. Stojadinovic A, Brennan MF, Hoos A, et al. Adrenocortical adenoma and carcinoma: histopathological and molecular comparative analysis. Mod Pathol 2003;16:742-751. (Pubitemid 37011068)
42. Dalton LW, Pinder SE, Elston CE, et al. Histologic grading of breast cancer: linkage of patient outcome with level of pathologist agreement. Mod Pathol 2000;13:730-735. (Pubitemid 30470161)
43. Cross SS. Grading and scoring in histopathology. Histopathology 1998;33:99-106. (Pubitemid 28387018)
44. Silverberg SG. Reproducibility of the mitosis count in the histologic diagnosis of smooth muscle tumors of the uterus. Hum Pathol 1976;7:451-454.
45. Barry M, Sinha SK, Leader MB, Kay EW. Poor agreement in recognition of abnormal mitoses: requirement for standardized and robust definitions. Histopathology 2001;38:68-72. (Pubitemid 32126191)
46. Lopez-Rios F, Chuai S, Flores R, et al. Global gene expression profiling of pleural mesotheliomas: overexpression of aurora kinases and P16/CDKN2A deletion as prognostic Factors and critical evaluation of microarray-based prognostic prediction. Cancer Res 2006;66:2970-2979.
47. Wheatley-Price P, Yang B, Patsios D, et al. Soluble mesothelin-related peptide and osteopontin as markers of response in malignant mesothelioma. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3316-3322.
48. Ramos-Nino ME, Testa JR, Altomare DA, et al. Cellular and molecular parameters of mesothelioma. J Cell Biochem 2006;98:723-734. (Pubitemid 43993391)
49. Pass HI, Goparaju C, Ivanov S, et al. hsa-miR-29c* is linked to the prognosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Cancer Res 2010;70: 1916-1924.