Advertisement

World Journal of Urology

, Volume 33, Issue 12, pp 1929–1936 | Cite as

Impact of 2004 ISUP/WHO classification on bladder cancer grading

  • Soum D. Lokeshwar
  • Roberto Ruiz-Cordero
  • Marie C. Hupe
  • Merce Jorda
  • Mark S. SolowayEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To determine whether implementation of the 2004 WHO/ISUP bladder cancer (BCa) grading system caused a grade migration, i.e., more tumors being graded as high grade (HG).

Methods

Data on 1040 BCa cases from 668 patients treated at our institution between 2000 and 2013 and reviewed by six pathologists were evaluated: low grade (LG): 249; HG: 791; Ta: 389; T1: 214; CIS: 95; ≥T2: 342. Differences in LG or HG cases (expressed as %BCa cases/year) were analyzed by Mann–Whitney test. Correlation between the year of diagnosis and clinical/pathological parameters was evaluated by logistic regression analyses.

Results

During the study period, BCa cases diagnosed as LG significantly decreased with a corresponding increase in HG cases. Nonlinear regression analysis indicated that ~2008 was the crossover point for grade migration; %LG: 31.8 ± 4.8 (2000–2007); 14.1 ± 7.0 (2008–2013); %HG: 68.2 ± 4.8 (2000–2007); 85.9 ± 6.9 (2008–2013), P = 0.004. The grade migration was confined to Ta cases with %LG Ta cases diagnosed decreasing by 3.6-fold from 2000–2007 to 2008–2013 (P = 0.004). Univariate and multivariate analyses confirmed the grade migration following the adoption of the 2004 system (P < 0.0001). Kaplan–Meier curves showed no significant differences between the two time intervals in terms of disease progression (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Implementation of the 2004 WHO/ISUP system caused a significant increase in pathologists grading Ta cases as HG; however, this increase did not seem to correlate with disease progression. Since LG and HG Ta tumors are treated differently, grade migration may impact the clinical management of BCa patients.

Keywords

1998 WHO/ISUP grading 2004 WHO grading Bladder cancer Progression 

Abbreviations

BCa

Bladder cancer

BCG

Bacillus Calmette–Guerin

BT

Bladder tumor

HG

High grade

LG

Low grade

TUR

Transurethral resection

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

All human studies have been approved by University of Miami’s Institutional Review Board and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

References

  1. 1.
    Jordan AM, Weingarten J, Murphy WM (1987) Transitional cell neoplasms of the urinary bladder: can biologic potential be predicted from histologic grading? Cancer 60:2766–2774. Erratum: (1988) Cancer 61:1385Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kamat AM, Hegarty PK, Gee JR, Clark PE, Svatek RS, Hegarty N, Shariat SF, Xylinas E, Schmitz-Dräger BJ, Lotan Y, Jenkins LC, Droller M, van Rhijn BW, Karakiewicz PI, International Consultation on Urologic Disease-European Association of Urology Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012 (2013) ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: screening, diagnosis, and molecular markers. Eur Urol 63:4–15. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.057 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pezaro C, Liew MS, Davis ID (2012) Urothelial cancers: using biology to improve outcomes. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 12:87–98. doi: 10.1586/era.11.195 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amin MB, McKenney JK, Paner GP, Hansel DE, Grignon DJ, Montironi R, Lin O, Jorda M, Jenkins LC, Soloway M, Epstein JI, Reuter VE, International Consultation on Urologic Disease-European Association of Urology Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012 (2013) ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: pathology. Eur Urol 63:16–35. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.063 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burger M, Oosterlinck W, Konety B, Chang S, Gudjonsson S, Pruthi R, Soloway M, Solsona E, Sved P, Babjuk M, Brausi MA, Cheng C, Comperat E, Dinney C, Otto W, Shah J, Thürof J, Witjes JA, International Consultation on Urologic Disease-European Association of Urology Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012 (2013) ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 63:36–44. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.061 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gakis G, Efstathiou J, Lerner SP, Cookson MS, Keegan KA, Guru KA, Shipley WU, Heidenreich A, Schoenberg MP, Sagalowsky AI, Soloway MS, Stenzl A, International Consultation on Urologic Disease-European Association of Urology Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012 (2013) ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: radical cystectomy and bladder preservation for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 63:45–57. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheung G, Sahai A, Billia M, Dasgupta P, Khan MS (2013) Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer. BMC Med 11:13. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-13 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weizer AZ, Tallman C, Montgomery JS (2011) Long-term outcomes of intravesical therapy for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. World J Urol 29:59–71. doi: 10.1007/s00345-010-0617-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rodriguez Faba O, Gaya JM, López JM, Capell M, De Gracia-Nieto AE, Gomez Correa E, Breda A, Palou J (2013) Current management of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Minerva Med 104:273–286PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gandhi NM, Morales A, Lamm DL (2013) Bacillus Calmette-Guerin immunotherapy for genitourinary cancer. BJU Int 112:288–297. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11754.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith ZL, Christodouleas JP, Keefe SM, Malkowicz SB, Guzzo TJ (2013) Bladder preservation in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC): a review of the literature and a practical approach to therapy. BJU Int 112:13–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11762.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bergkvist A, Ljungqvist A, Moberger G (1965) Classification of bladder tumours based on the cellular pattern. Preliminary report of a clinical–pathological study of 300 cases with a minimum follow-up of eight years. Acta Chir Scand 130:371–378PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, Mostofi FK (1998) The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am J Surg Pathol 22:1435–1448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Otto W, Denzinger S, Fritsche HM, Burger M, Wieland WF, Hofstädter F, Hartmann A, Bertz S (2011) The WHO classification of 1973 is more suitable than the WHO classification of 2004 for predicting survival in pT1 urothelial bladder cancer. BJU Int 107:404–408. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09515.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amin MB, Reuter VE, Epstein J, Grignon DJ, Hansel DE, Lin O, McKenney JK, Montironi R, Paner GP, Soloway M, Members of the Pathology of Bladder Cancer Working group (2012) Pathology consensus guidelines by the pathology of bladder cancer work group. In: Soloway MS, Khoury S (eds) Bladder Cancer, 2nd International Consultation on Bladder Cancer, 2nd edn., pp 63–168Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reuter VE, Epstein JI, Amin MB, Mostofi FK (1999) The “WHO/ISUP consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms”: continued discussion. Hum Pathol 30:879–880CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Miyamoto H, Miller JS, Fajardo DA, Lee TK, Netto GJ, Epstein JI (2010) Non-invasive papillary urothelial neoplasms: the 2004 WHO/ISUP classification system. Pathol Int 60:1–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1827.2009.02477.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cao D, Vollmer RT, Luly J, Jain S, Roytman TM, Ferris CW, Hudson MA (2010) Comparison of 2004 and 1973 World Health Organization grading systems and their relationship to pathologic staging for predicting long-term prognosis in patients with urothelial carcinoma. Urology 76:593–599. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.01.032 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    May M, Brookman-Amissah S, Roigas J, Hartmann A, Störkel S, Kristiansen G, Gilfrich C, Borchardt R, Hoschke B, Kaufmann O, Guina S (2010) Prognostic accuracy of individual pathologists in noninvasive urinary bladder carcinoma a multicenter study comparing the 1973 and 2004 World Health Organisation Classifications. Eur Urol 57:850–858. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.03 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Burger M, Denzinger S, Wieland WF, Stief GC, Hartmann A, Zaak D (2008) Does the current World Health Organization classification predict outcome better in patients with noninvasive bladder cancer of early or regular onset? BJU Int 102:194–197. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07538.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yin H, Leong AS (2004) Histologic grading of noninvasive papillary urothelial tumors: validation of the 1998 WHO/ISIP system by immunophenotyping and follow-up. Am J Clin Pathol 121:679–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Miyamoto H, Brimo F, Schultz L, Ye H, Miller JS, Fajardo DA, Lee TK, Epstein JI, Netto GJ (2010) Low-grade papillary urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic analysis of a post-World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology classification cohort from a single academic center. Arch Pathol Lab Med 134:1160–1163. doi: 10.1043/2009-0403-OA.1 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schned AR, Andrew AS, Marsit CJ, Zens MS, Kelsey KT, Karagas MR (2007) Survival following the diagnosis of noninvasive bladder cancer: WHO/International Society of Urological Pathology versus WHO classification systems. J Urol 178:1196–1200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pan CC, Chang YH, Chen KK, Yu HJ, Sun CH, Ho DM (2010) Constructing prognostic model incorporating the 2004 WHO/ISUP classification for patients with non-muscle-invasive urothelial tumours of the urinary bladder. J Clin Pathol 63:910–915. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2010.079764 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen Z, Ding W, Xu K, Tan J, Sun C, Gou Y, Tong S, Xia G, Fang Z, Ding Q (2012) The 1973 WHO Classification is more suitable than the 2004 WHO Classification for predicting prognosis in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. PLoS One 7:e47199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047199 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pellucchi F, Freschi M, Ibrahim B, Rocchini L, Maccagnano C, Briganti A, Rigatti P, Montorsi F, Colombo R (2011) Clinical reliability of the 2004 WHO histological classification system compared with the 1973 WHO system for Ta primary bladder tumors. J Urol 186:2194–2199. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.070 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hansel DE, Miller JS, Cookson MS, Chang SS (2013) Challenges in the pathology of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a dialogue between the urologic surgeon and the pathologist. Urology 81:1123–1130. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.027 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    van Rhijn BW, van Leenders GJ, Ooms BC, Kirkels WJ, Zlotta AR, Boeve ER, Jöbsis AC, von der Kwast TH (2010) The pathologist’s mean grade is constant and individualizes the prognostic value of bladder cancer grading. Eur Urol 57:1052–1057. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.09.022 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gonul II, Poyraz A, Unsal C, Acar C, Alkibay T (2007) Comparison of 1998 WHO/ISUP and 1973 WHO classifications for interobserver variability in grading of papillary urothelial neoplasms of the bladder. Pathological evaluation of 258 cases. Urol Int 78:338–344CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Soloway MS, Bruck DS, Kim SS (2003) Expectant management of small, recurrent, noninvasive papillary bladder tumors. J Urol 170:438–441CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Soum D. Lokeshwar
    • 1
  • Roberto Ruiz-Cordero
    • 2
  • Marie C. Hupe
    • 3
  • Merce Jorda
    • 2
  • Mark S. Soloway
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Honors Program in Medical EducationUniversity of MiamiCoral GablesUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyUniversity of Miami, Miller School of MedicineMiamiUSA
  3. 3.Department of Urology and Urologic OncologyHannover Medical SchoolHannoverGermany
  4. 4.Urology OncologyHollywood Memorial HospitalBal HarbourUSA

Personalised recommendations