Journal
EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages 438-446Publisher
ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.03.017
Keywords
Bladder cancer; Grading system; WHO 2004; WHO 1973; Expert opinion; Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer; Pathology
Categories
Funding
- International Society of Urological Pathology
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This article explores the requirements for an optimal grading system for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer through expert opinion. It suggests splitting the WHO 2004 high-grade category into WHO 1973 grade 2 and 3 subsets, providing more detailed histological criteria. These changes may lead to better treatment decisions for patients with bladder cancer.
Context: Grading is the mainstay for treatment decisions for patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Objective: To determine the requirements for an optimal grading system for NMIBC via expert opinion. Evidence acquisition: A multidisciplinary working group established by the International Society of Urological Pathology reviewed available clinical, histopathological, and molecular evidence for an optimal grading system for bladder cancer. Evidence synthesis: Bladder cancer grading is a continuum and five different grading systems based on historical grounds could be envisaged. Splitting of the World Health Organization (WHO) 2004 low-grade class for NMIBC lacks diagnostic reproducibility and molecular-genetic support, while showing little difference in progression rate. Subdividing the clinically heterogeneous WHO 2004 high-grade class for NMIBC into intermediate and high risk categories using the WHO 1973 grading is supported by both clinical and molecular-genetic findings. Grading criteria for the WHO 1973 scheme were detailed on the basis of literature findings and expert opinion. Conclusions: Splitting of the WHO 2004 high-grade category into WHO 1973 grade 2 and 3 subsets is recommended. Provision of more detailed histological criteria for the WHO 1973 grading might facilitate the general acceptance of a hybrid four-tiered grading system or-as a preferred option-a more reproducible three-tiered system distinguishing low-, intermediate (high)-, and high-grade NMIBC. Patient summary: Improvement of the current systems for grading bladder cancer may result in better informed treatment decisions for patients with bladder cancer. (C) 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available