Does the gross prosector impact pT3 subclassification or lymph node counts in bladder cancer?

Human Pathology

Volumn 61, Issue , 2017, Pages 190-198

  Tretter, Eric M ^a   Ebel, Joshua J ^a   Pohar, Kamal S ^a   Zynger, Debra L ^a  

^a THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY WEXNER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bladder cancer; Grossing; Lymph node; Prosector; pT3

Indexed keywords

ADIPOSE TISSUE; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLADDER CARCINOMA; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CYSTECTOMY; FEMALE; GROSS PROSECTOR; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; PATHOLOGIST; RESIDENT; SURGEON; TISSUE SECTION; TUMOR INVASION; BIOPSY; CARCINOMA; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DOCUMENTATION; EVALUATION STUDY; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MEDICAL RECORD; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SECONDARY; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADIPOSE TISSUE; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY; CARCINOMA; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CYSTECTOMY; DOCUMENTATION; FEMALE; FORMS AND RECORDS CONTROL; HUMANS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPH NODES; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; MEDICAL RECORDS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85012295509     PISSN: 00468177     EISSN: 15328392     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2016.12.009     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. [1] Edge, S., Byrd, D.R., Compton, C.C., Fritz, A.G., Greene, F.L., Trotti, A., AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed., 2010, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
2. [2] Amin, M., (eds.) AJCC cancer staging manual, 8th ed., 2017, Springer-Verlag, Chicago, IL.
3. [3] American Cancer Society, Cancer facts & figures 2016. 2016, American Cancer Society, Atlanta.
4. [4] Stein, J.P., Lieskovsky, G., Cote, R., et al. Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin Oncol 19 (2001), 666–675.
5. [5] Dincel, C., Kara, C., Balci, U., et al. Comparison of microscopic (pT3a) and gross extravesical extension (pT3b) in pathological staging of bladder cancer: analysis of patient outcomes. Int Urol Nephrol 45 (2013), 387–393.
6. [6] D'Souza, A.M., Pohar, K.S., Arif, T., Geyer, S., Zynger, D.L., Retrospective analysis of survival in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: impact of pT classification, node status, lymphovascular invasion, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Virchows Arch 461 (2012), 467–474.
7. [7] Zarei, S., Frank, I., Boorjian, S.A., et al. Prognostic significance of measured depth of invasion of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder compared to the 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer pT2 and pT3 classifications. J Urol 188 (2012), 1706–1711.
8. [8] Neuzillet, Y., Lebret, T., Molinie, V., et al. Perivesical fat invasion in bladder cancer: implications for prognosis comparing pT2b, pT3a and pT3b stages and consequences for adjuvant chemotherapy indications. BJU Int 110 (2012), 1736–1741.
9. [9] Sonpavde, G., Khan, M.M., Svatek, R.S., et al. Prognostic risk stratification of pathological stage T3N0 bladder cancer after radical cystectomy. J Urol 185 (2011), 1216–1221.
10. [10] Tilki, D., Svatek, R.S., Karakiewicz, P.I., et al. pT3 substaging is a prognostic indicator for lymph node negative urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol 184 (2010), 470–474.
11. [11] Wein, A.J., Kavoussi, L.R., Partin, A.W., Peters, C.A., Campbell-Walsh urology. 11th ed., 2012, Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia, PA.
12. [12] Brunocilla, E., Pernetti, R., Schiavina, R., et al. The number of nodes removed as well as the template of the dissection is independently correlated to cancer-specific survival after radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Int Urol Nephrol 45 (2013), 711–719.
13. [13] Rink, M., Shariat, S.F., Xylinas, E., et al. Does increasing the nodal yield improve outcomes in patients without nodal metastasis at radical cystectomy?. World J Urol 30 (2012), 807–814.
14. [14] Wright, J.L., Lin, D.W., Porter, M.P., The association between extent of lymphadenectomy and survival among patients with lymph node metastases undergoing radical cystectomy. Cancer 112 (2008), 2401–2408.
15. [15] Fransen van de Putte, E.E., Hermans, T.J., Werkhoven, E., et al. Lymph node count at radical cystectomy does not influence long-term survival if surgeons adhere to a standardized template. Urol Oncol 33 (2015), 504.e19–504.e24.
16. [16] Mertens, L.S., Meijer, R.P., van Werkhoven, E., et al. Differences in histopathological evaluation of standard lymph node dissections result in differences in nodal count but not in survival. World J Urol 31 (2013), 1297–1302.
17. [17] Park, J., Kim, S., Jeong, I.G., et al. Does the greater number of lymph nodes removed during standard lymph node dissection predict better patient survival following radical cystectomy?. World J Urol 29 (2011), 443–449.
18. [18] Parkash, V., Bifulco, C., Feinn, R., Concato, J., Jain, D., To count and how to count, that is the question: interobserver and intraobserver variability among pathologists in lymph node counting. Am J Clin Pathol 134 (2010), 42–49.
19. [19] Zehnder, P., Moltzahn, F., Mitra, A.P., et al. Radical cystectomy with super-extended lymphadenectomy: impact of separate vs en bloc lymph node submission on analysis and outcomes. BJU Int 117 (2016), 253–259.
20. [20] Bochner, B.H., Herr, H.W., Reuter, V.E., Impact of separate versus en bloc pelvic lymph node dissection on the number of lymph nodes retrieved in cystectomy specimens. J Urol 166 (2001), 2295–2296.
21. [21] Lester, S.C., Manual of surgical pathology, 3rd ed. 2010, Saunders, Philadelphia, PA.
22. [22] Chandra, A., Griffiths, D., McWilliam, L.J., Best practice: gross examination and sampling of surgical specimens from the urinary bladder. J Clin Pathol 63 (2010), 475–479.
23. [23] 2013 College of American Pathologists Protocol for the Examination of Specimens from Patients with Carcinoma of the Urinary bladder. Available at: http://www.cap.org/ShowProperty?nodePath=/UCMCon/ContributionFolders/WebContent/pdf/urinary-13protocol-3210.pdf [Accessed November 10, 2016.].
24. [24] Hecht, J.L., To count and how to count, that is the question. Am J Clin Pathol, 135, 2011, 480.
25. [25] Herr, H.W., Faulkner, J.R., Grossman, H.B., Crawford, E.D., Pathologic evaluation of radical cystectomy specimens: a cooperative group report. Cancer 100 (2004), 2470–2475.
26. [26] Chamie, K., Ballon-Landa, E., Bassett, J.C., et al. Quality of diagnostic staging in patients with bladder cancer: a process-outcomes link. Cancer 121 (2015), 379–385.
27. [27] Liszka, L., Mrowiec, S., Kusnierz, K., Kajor, M., Standardized grossing protocol is useful for the pathology reporting of malignant neoplasms other than adenocarcinomas treated with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Histol Histopathol, 11781, 2016.
28. [28] Ananthanarayanan, V., Pan, Y., Tretiakova, M., et al. Influence of histologic criteria and confounding factors in staging equivocal cases for microscopic perivesical tissue invasion (pT3a): an interobserver study among genitourinary pathologists. Am J Surg Pathol 38 (2014), 167–175.
29. [29] Amin, M.B., McKenney, J.K., Paner, G.P., et al. International Consultation on Urologic Disease–European Association of Urology Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012. ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: Pathology. Eur Urol 63 (2013), 16–35.
30. [30] Adsay, N.V., Bagci, P., Tajiri, T., et al. Pathologic staging of pancreatic, ampullary, biliary, and gallbladder cancers: pitfalls and practical limitations of the current AJCC/UICC TNM staging system and opportunities for improvement. Semin Diagn Pathol 29 (2012), 127–141.
31. [31] Schoenleber, S.J., Schnelldorfer, T., Wood, C.M., Qin, R., Sarr, M.G., Donohue, J.H., Factors influencing lymph node recovery from the operative specimen after gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 13 (2009), 1233–1237.
32. [32] Ostadi, M.A., Harnish, J.L., Stegienko, S., Urbach, D.R., Factors affecting the number of lymph nodes retrieved in colorectal cancer specimens. Surg Endosc 21 (2007), 2142–2146.
33. [33] Galvis, C.O., Raab, S.S., D'Amico, F., Grzybicki, D.M., Pathologists' assistants practice: a measurement of performance. Am J Clin Pathol 116 (2001), 816–822.
34. [34] Kuijpers, C.C., van Slooten, H.J., Schreurs, W.H., et al. Better retrieval of lymph nodes in colorectal resection specimens by pathologists' assistants. J Clin Pathol 66 (2013), 18–23.
35. [35] Forde, G.K., Carlson, J.W., Downey, G.O., Doss, B.J., Shoemaker, A., Harrison, C.R., A quality process study of lymph node evaluation in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Pathol 30 (2011), 335–339.