Variants and new entities of bladder cancer

López-Beltrán, Antonio; Henriques, Vanessa; Montironi, Rodolfo; Cimadamore, Alessia; Raspollini, Maria Rosaria; Cheng, Liang

doi:10.1111/his.13752

Cited by 133 publications

(136 citation statements)

References 106 publications

(539 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The traditional classification system for bladder cancer is mainly based on pathological parameters (8,9). Under similar pathological staging and grading, the recurrence and progression of bladder cancer vary greatly among different individuals and directly affect the optimal monitoring and treatment schedules (10,11). For example, according to the EORTC software system calculation (https://www.eortc.be/tools/ bladdercalculator/), primary Ta grade 3 bladder cancer is a highrisk bladder cancer, with a 5 years recurrence rate of 46% and a 5 years progression risk of 6%, which indicates that 94% of patients will not progress to MIBC within 5 years.…”

Section: Traditional Classification and Molecular Subtyping Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traditional Classification and Novel Subtyping Systems for Bladder Cancer

Zhu

Xiao-mi

et al. 2020

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bladder cancer is the most common tumor in the urinary system, with approximately 420,000 new cases and 160,000 deaths per year. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EOTRC) classifies non-muscular invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) into low-risk, medium-risk and high-risk groups based on a comprehensive analysis of NMIBC pathological parameters and the risk of recurrence and progression to muscular invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Traditional classification systems are based on pathologic grading, staging systems, and clinical prognosis. However, the pathological parameters of the tumor cannot fully reflect the "intrinsic characteristics" of bladder cancer, and tumors with a similar pathology exhibit different biological behaviors. Furthermore, although the traditional classification system cannot accurately predict the risk of recurrence or the progression of bladder cancer patients (BCs) individually, this method is widely used in clinical practice because of its convenient operation. With the development of sequencing and other technologies, the genetics-based molecular subtyping of bladder cancer has become increasingly studied. Compared with the traditional classification system, it provides more abundant tumor biological information and is expected to assist or even replace the traditional typing system in the future.

show abstract

Section: Traditional Classification and Molecular Subtyping Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traditional Classification and Novel Subtyping Systems for Bladder Cancer

Zhu

Xiao-mi

et al. 2020

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, as we move towards molecular diagnostics in bladder cancer, presence of morphologic and molecular variants can complicate accurate diagnosis. The most common morphologic variant of UCC is squamous differentiation, which is characterized by the presence of intercellular bridging and the formation of keratin "pearls" [5]. It has been estimated that up to 40% of muscle invasive UCC cases present with patterns of squamous differentiation.…”

Section: Morphology: the First Level Of Tumor Heterogeneity In Bladdementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similar to squamous differentiation, glandular differentiation is present in an estimated 10% of muscle invasive UCC cases [11], and is associated with a higher incidence of extravesical tumors and metastasis to lymph nodes, as well as a higher risk of recurrence after treatment [8,9]. In addition to these morphologic variants, others including neuroendocrine/small cell, plasmacytoid, micropapillary, etc (reviewed here [5,12]) are frequently present in bladder cancer. As discussed below, morphologic and molecular heterogeneity are often linked, which adds to the complex nature of this disease state.…”

Section: Morphology: the First Level Of Tumor Heterogeneity In Bladdementioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Tumor Heterogeneity in Bladder Cancer: The Current State of the Field and Future Needs

Seyer

Lehman

DeGraff

2019

BLC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Tumor heterogeneity has been recognized in many cancer types for decades. However, the significance of tumor heterogeneity on disease course and clinical outcome in bladder cancer is of more recent interest to researchers and clinicians. This is especially true as morphologic and molecular heterogeneity has the potential to confound accurate diagnosis, efficient prognostication, and subsequent clinical management. While this is true, it is not always clear what laboratory models are available or suitable for the study of these important clinical phenomena. OBJECTIVE: To review in vitro and in vivo laboratory models for the study of morphologic and molecular tumor heterogeneity in bladder cancer. METHODS: We undertook a review of PubMed with a focus on identifying suitable models for the study of tumor heterogeneity in bladder cancer. RESULTS: We provide a review of common in vivo (genetically engineered mice and patient-derived xenografts) and in vitro (established cell lines and organoid systems) models and discuss their utility in the study of morphologic and molecular tumor heterogeneity in bladder cancer. CONCLUSION: Genetically engineered mouse models and patient-derived xenografts provide complementary approaches for the study of tumor heterogeneity in bladder cancer. In addition, cell culture-based systems provide a system amenable to genetic manipulation and mechanistic studies, while organoid systems bridge the gap between in vivo and in vitro systems. However, the availability of models to study molecular heterogeneity is limited, partly because of a relative lack of molecular characterization of available models. In summary, while models for the study of specific subsets of morphologic heterogeneity are available, more models are required for studies of molecular heterogeneity. This shortcoming could be partially addressed by more comprehensively characterizing currently available model systems. In addition, each system/approach has advantages and disadvantages, and care should be taken when selecting a given model.

show abstract

“…One of the hallmark features of urothelial carcinoma is its capacity to exhibit a wide variety of morphological variants. The nested variant of invasive urothelial carcinoma (NVUC) is one such variant that is often regarded as being deceptively low‐grade, yet despite the cytologically bland nature of these tumours, NVUC is associated with aggressive outcomes with similar survival rates to conventional high‐grade urothelial carcinoma . In the 2016 edition of the World Health Organisation classification of tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs , NVUC is described as having two different subtypes: the conventional nested variant in addition to the so‐called large nested variant that is distinguished by the formation of broad nests of low‐grade urothelial cells with a pushing invasive front.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%