Oncological predictive value of the 2004 World Health Organisation grading classification in primary T1 non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. A step forward or back?

BJU International

Volumn 115, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 267-273

  Pellucchi, Federico ^a   Freschi, Massimo ^b   Moschini, Marco ^a   Rocchini, Lorenzo ^a   Maccagnano, Carmen ^a   Nazareno, Suardi ^a   Bergamaschi, Franco ^a   Montorsi, Francesco ^a   Colombo, Renzo ^a  

^a S MARIA NUOVA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^b VITA SALUTE SAN RAFFAELE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

1973 WHO classification; 2004 WHO classification; grading; non muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma; pT1 bladder cancer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PROGNOSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NON MUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; RELIABILITY; TRANSURETHRAL RESECTION; BLADDER TUMOR; CLASSIFICATION; CYSTECTOMY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRANSITIONAL CELL CARCINOMA; VERY ELDERLY; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

BCG VACCINE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BCG VACCINE; CARCINOMA, TRANSITIONAL CELL; CYSTECTOMY; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 84921605035     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bju.12666     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Sylvester RJ, van der Meijden AP, Oosterlinck W, et al. Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 466-5
2. Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, Mostofi FK,. The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 1435-1448
3. Reuter VE, Epstein JI, Amin MB, Mostofi FK,. 'WHO/ISUP Consensus Classification of Urothelial (Transitional Cell) Neoplasms': continued discussion. Hum Pathol 1999; 30: 879-880
4. Oosterhuis JW, Schapers RF, Janssen-Heijnen ML, et al. Histological grading of papillary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: prognostic value of the 1998 WHO/ISUP classification system and comparison with conventional grading systems. J Clin Pathol 2002; 55: 900-905
5. Epstein JI,. The new World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) classification for TA, T1 bladder tumors: is it an improvement? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2003; 47: 83-89
6. Yorukoglu K, Tuna B, Dikicioglu E, et al. Reproducibility of the 1998 World Health Organization/International Society of Urologic Pathology classification of papillary urothelial neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Virchows Arch 2003; 443: 734-740
7. Bircan S, Candir O, Serel TA,. Comparison of WHO 1973, WHO/ISUP 1998, WHO 1999 grade and combined scoring systems in evaluation of bladder carcinoma. Urol Int 2004; 73: 201-208
8. Gonul II, Poyraz A, Unsal C, Acar C, Alkibay T,. Comparison of 1998 WHO/ISUP and 1973 WHO classifications for interobserver variability in grading of papillary urothelial neoplasms of the bladder. Pathological evaluation of 258 cases. Urol Int 2007; 78: 338-344
9. Pan CC, Chang YH, Chen KK, Yu HJ, Sun CH, Ho DM,. Prognostic significance of the 2004 WHO/ISUP classification for prediction of recurrence, progression, and cancer-specific mortality of non-muscle-invasive urothelial tumors of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic study of 1,515 cases. Am J Clin Pathol 2010; 133: 788-795
10. Pan CC, Chang YH, Chen KK, Yu HJ, Sun CH, Ho DM,. Constructing prognostic model incorporating the 2004 WHO/ISUP classification for patients with non-muscle-invasive urothelial tumours of the urinary bladder. J Clin Pathol 2010; 63: 910-915
11. Babjuk M, Burger M, Zigeuner R, et al. EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2013. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 639-653
12. Hall MC, Chang SS, Dalbagni G, et al. Guideline for the management of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (stages Ta, T1, and Tis): 2007 update. J Urol 2007; 178: 2314-2330
13. Clark PE, Agarwal N, Biagioli MC, et al. Bladder cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2013; 11: 446-475
14. Miyamoto H, Brimo F, Schultz L, et al. Low-gradepapillary urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic analysis of a post-World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology classification cohort from a single academic center. Arch Patho Lab Med 2010; 134: 1160-1163
15. May M, Brookman-Amissah S, Roigas J, et al. Prognostic accuracy of individual uropathologists in noninvasive urinary bladder carcinoma: a multicentre study comparing the 1973 and 2004 World Health Organisation classifications. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 850-858
16. Pellucchi F, Freschi M, Ibrahim B, et al. Clinical reliability of the 2004 WHO histological classification system compared with the 1973 WHO system for Ta primary bladder tumors. J Urol 2011; 186: 2194-2199
17. Chen Z, Ding W, Xu K, et al. The 1973 WHO Classification is more suitable than the 2004 WHO Classification for predicting prognosis in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: 10
18. Pan CC, Chang YH, Chen KK, et al. Constructing prognostic model incorporating the 2004 WHO/ISUP classification for patients with non-muscleinvasiveurothelial tumours of the urinary bladder. J Clin Pathol 2010; 63: 910
19. Cao D, Vollmer RT, Luly J, et al. Comparison of 2004 and 1973 World Health Organization grading systems and their relationship to pathologic staging for predicting long-term prognosis in patients with urothelial carcinoma. Urology 2010; 76: 593
20. Otto W, Denzinger S, Fritsche HM, et al. The WHO classification of 1973 is more suitable than the WHO classification of 2004 for predicting survival in pT1 urothelial bladder cancer. BJU Int 2011; 107: 404
21. Murphy WM, Takezawa K, Maruniak NA,. Interobserver discrepancy using the 1998 World Health Organization/International Society of Urologic Pathology classification of urothelial neoplasms: practical choices for patient care. J Urol 2002; 168: 968
22. May M, Brookman-Amissah S, Roigas J, et al. Prognostic accuracy of individual uropathologists in noninvasive urinary bladder carcinoma: a multicentre study comparing the 1973 and 2004 World Health Organisation classifications. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 850-858
23. Cheng L, MacLennan GT, Lopez-Beltran A,. Histologic grading of urothelial carcinoma: a reappraisal. Hum Pathol 2012; 43: 2097-2108
24. Tuna B, Yörükoglu K, Düzcan E, et al. Histologic grading of urothelial papillary neoplasms: impact of combined grading (two-numbered grading system) on reproducibility. Virchows Arch 2011; 458: 659
25. Cottrell L, Nairn ER, Hair M,. Consistency of microstaging pT1 bladder transitional cell carcinoma. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60: 735-736
26. Chang WC, Chang YH, Pan CC,. Prognostic significance in substaging of T1 urinary bladder urothelial carcinoma on transurethral resection. Am J Surg Pathol 2012; 36: 454-461
27. van Rhijn BW, van der Kwast TH, Alkhateeb SS, et al. A new and highly prognostic system to discern T1 bladder cancer substage. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 378-384
28. Liedberg F, Lauss M, Patschan O, et al. Lund Bladder Cancer Group. The importance of being grade 3: WHO 1999 versus WHO 2004 pathologic grading. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 620-623