☆ 4.5 Letter

Reply to Rodolfo Montironi, Marina Scarpelli, Alessia Cimadamore, and Gregor Mikuz's Letter to the Editor re: Theo van der Kwast, Fredrik Liedberg, Peter C. Black, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology Expert Opinion on Grading of Urothelial Carcinoma. Eur Urol Focus. In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. euf.2021.03.017. Focus on Our Personal Recollections and Observations

EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS (2022)

Related references

Note: Only part of the references are listed.

Review Urology & Nephrology

International Society of Urological Pathology Expert Opinion on Grading of Urothelial Carcinoma

Theo van der Kwast et al.

Summary: 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.

EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS (2022)

Add to Collection

Article Oncology

Prognostic Value of the WHO1973 and WHO2004/2016 Classification Systems for Grade in Primary Ta/T1 Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: A Multicenter European Association of Urology Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel Study

Bas W. G. van Rhijn et al.

Summary: The study compared the prognostic value of WHO1973 and WHO2004/2016 classification systems in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients, showing that WHO1973 had a higher predictive value for progression compared to WHO2004/2016, while both systems were not significantly predictive for recurrence. The combined use of both systems can better stratify patients and improve the accuracy of prognosis prediction.

EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY (2021)

Add to Collection

Article Oncology