4.6 Article

The role and impact of pathology review on stage and grade assessment of stages Ta and T1 bladder tumors: A combined analysis of 5 European organization for research and treatment of cancer trials

期刊

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 164, 期 5, 页码 1533-1537

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67022-X

关键词

bladder; bladder neoplasms; clinical trials; pathology, surgical

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [2U10 CA11488-25] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Pathological interpretations are largely subject to interpathologist and intrapathologist variation. Differences in tumor stage and grade exist in local and review pathological findings in patients with stage Ta-T1 bladder tumors who are entered in randomized trials of adjuvant treatment after transurethral resection. Because they are diagnosed and treated based on local pathological results, it is important to determine the reliability of local pathological evaluations and the extent to which pathology review may change the treatment decision process. Materials and Methods: We assessed local and review pathology results in 1,400 patients treated in 5 European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized phase III trials comparing various adjuvant prophylactic treatment strategies for primary or recurrent stage Ta-T1 transitional cell bladder cancer. Results: We noted large variations in T category and grade. Pathology review down staged T category to stage Ta in 53% of eases originally classified as stage TI. There was agreement in only 57% and 50% of stage Ta grade 1 and stage T1 grade 3 cases, of which 10% were reclassified as muscle invasive disease greater than stage T1. While T category and grade have prognostic importance, differences in the prognosis based on local and review pathological studies were slight. Conclusions: Pathology review is not mandatory in low and intermediate risk cases since it has little impact on the prognosis and treatment decision making. In high risk cases of stage T1 grade 3 disease stage or grade is often changed, so that review remains essential in this subgroup.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据