2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.03.052
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prognostic Accuracy of Individual Uropathologists in Noninvasive Urinary Bladder Carcinoma: A Multicentre Study Comparing the 1973 and 2004 World Health Organisation Classifications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
86
0
13

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 145 publications
(102 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
3
86
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, as the tumour grade of all patients with NMIBC was always assigned to a single expert uro-pathologist, the interobserver discrepancy for grading attribution could not be addressed. It should be recognised that, although a single-pathologist report can be seen as an advantage with respect to the continuity of the process over the years and reflecting many clinical routine contexts, it may also be considered the major criticism of the present results [21][22][23][24]. The absence in the multivariable analysis of histological microstaging and lymphovascular invasion (available for ∼50 and 30% of cases, respectively) might be considered as an additional limiting factor for results interpretation [25][26][27].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, as the tumour grade of all patients with NMIBC was always assigned to a single expert uro-pathologist, the interobserver discrepancy for grading attribution could not be addressed. It should be recognised that, although a single-pathologist report can be seen as an advantage with respect to the continuity of the process over the years and reflecting many clinical routine contexts, it may also be considered the major criticism of the present results [21][22][23][24]. The absence in the multivariable analysis of histological microstaging and lymphovascular invasion (available for ∼50 and 30% of cases, respectively) might be considered as an additional limiting factor for results interpretation [25][26][27].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…According to the EORTC risk tables, all pT1 G3 tumours should be considered at high risk for recurrence and progression and treated accordingly; however, it is not certain that we can translate this statement directly to the overall population with pT1 high grade tumours. Preliminary studies [14,15], including the study recently published by our group [16], have reported that the 2004 WHO grading system is a suitable and reliable prognostic factor with regard to papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential and pTa low grade urothelial carcinomas, but very few clinical studies specifically designed to investigate the prognostic reliability of the novel grading classification for pT1 high grade tumours have been completed. In addition, most of the published studies have included many limiting factors and many incorporated a heterogeneous patient population for both disease stage and tumour characteristics (recurrence, size, number, concomitant CIS).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this pathological assessment highly depends on the experience of the pathologist and suffers from high-interobserver and -intraobserver variation. 8,25 Upgrading and upstaging could increase the 5-year progression risk up to 45%-according to the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer risk calculator. This emphasizes the importance of accurate pathological assessment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lokal patologların yüksek dereceli Ta olarak değerlendirdi-ği preparatların sadece %23 'ünün nihai sonucu yüksek dereceli Ta olarak kabul edilmiştir [7]. 2004 WHO sınıflamasında diğer sınıflamalara özellikle de 1973 sınıflandırmasına göre bu farklı-lıklar daha aza indirgenmiştir [11]. Sonuç olarak T evresi, CIS ve yüksek dereceli lezyonların ayrıntılı bir şekilde gözden geçirme-sini şiddetle önerilmektedir.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified