Advertisement

Reproducibility of a Histogenetic Classification of Thymic Epithelial Tumours

  • Pauline M. Close
  • Thomas Kirchner
  • Cornelius J. Uys
  • Hans Konrad Müller-Hermelink

Abstract

A histogenetic classification of thymic epithelial neoplasms proposed by Müller-Hermelink and co-workers has been shown by a number of recent studies to be of clinical and prognostic value. Reproducibility is an important criterion for the acceptance of any new classification for general diagnostic use. The reproducibility of this classification was tested on 51 cases of thymic epithelial neoplasia, by comparing results obtained by pathologists working from published criteria only with results obtained by the pathologists who developed the classification. In 78% of cases there was complete concordance of results. Analysis of the 22% discordant cases showed that this discordance was due to a degree of subjectivity in determining cut-off points between categories adjacent to each other in the morphologic spectrum of thymic epithelial neoplasia (medullary vs mixed, cortical vs well-differentiated thymic carcinoma). In terms of the important clinical distinction between benign (medullary and mixed) thymomas and those with more aggressive biological behaviour (cortical types and well-differentiated thymic carcinoma), the degree of reproducibility was 96%. The high degree of reproducibility of this histogenetic classification of thymic epithelial neoplasms should facilitate its acceptance and use in routine diagnostic pathology.

Keywords

Thymic Carcinoma Thymic Epithelial Cell Discordant Case Aggressive Biological Behaviour Thymic Epithelial Tumour 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Levine GD, Rosai J. Thymic hyperplasia and neoplasia: a review of current concepts. Hum. Pathol. 1978; 9; 495–515.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salyer WR, Eggleston J C. Thymoma. A clinical and pathological study of 65 cases. Cancer 1976; 37; 229–249.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lewis JE, Wick MR, Scheithauer BW et al. Thymoma: A clinicopathologic review. Cancer 1987; 60; 2727–2743.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gray GF, Gutowski WT. Thymoma: a clinicopathologic study of 54 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1979; 3; 235–249.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kornstein M. Controversies regarding the pathology of thymomas. Path Annu 1992; part 21-15.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Snover DC, Levine GD, Rosai J. Thymic carcinoma. Five distinctive histological variants. Am J Surg Pathol 1982; 6; 451–470.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wick MR, Weiland LH, Scheithauer BW et al. Primary thymic carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol 1982; 6; 613–630.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuo T, Chang J-P, Lin F-J, Wu W-C et al. Thymic carcinomas: Histopathologial varieties and immunohistochemical study. Am J Surg Pathol 1990; 14; 24–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marino M, Müller-Hermelink HK. Thymoma and thymic carcinoma. Relation of thymoma epithelial cells to the cortical and medullary differentiation of thymus. Virchows Arch [Pathol Anat] 1985; 407; 119–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Müller-Hermelink HK, Marino M, Palestro G. Pathology of thymic epithelial tumours. In: Müller-Hermelink HK, ed. Current Topics in Pathology: The Human Thymus. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1986:208–268.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kirchner T, Müller-Hermelink HK. New approaches to the diagnosis of thymic epithelial tumors. Progress in Surgical Pathology 1989; 10; 167–189.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kirchner T, Schalke B, Buchwald J et al. We 11-differentiated thymic carcinoma. An organotypical low-grade carcinoma with relationship to cortical thymoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1992; 16; 1153–1169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pescarmona E, Rendina EA, Venuta F et al. The prognostic implication of thymoma histologic subtype. A study of 80 consecutive cases. Am J Clin Pathol 1990; 93; 190–195.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pescarmona E, Rendina EA, Venuta F et al. Analyis of prognostic factors and clinicopathological staging of thymoma. Ann Thorac Surg 1990; 50; 534–538.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kirchner T, Schalke B, Marx A et al. Evaluation of prognostic features in thymic epithelial tumours. Thymus 1989; 14; 195–203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Close PM, Uys CJ. Thymic pathology: 32 years’ experience in Cape Town. Presented at the 3rd Meeting of the European Association for Haematopathology. Würzburg, Germany 7–11 October 1990. (Abstract)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kuo TT, Lo SK. Thymoma: a study of the pathologic classification of 71 cases with evaluation of the Müller-Hermelink system. Hum Pathol. 1993; 24; 766–771.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quintanilla-Martinez L, Wilkins EW, Ferry JA, Harris NL. Thymoma — Morphologic subclassification correlates with invasiveness and immunohistologic features. A study of 122 cases. Hum Pathol 1993; 24; 958–969.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pauline M. Close
    • 1
  • Thomas Kirchner
    • 2
  • Cornelius J. Uys
    • 1
  • Hans Konrad Müller-Hermelink
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anatomical PathologyUniversity of Cape Town and Groote Schuur HospitalCape TownSouth Africa
  2. 2.Institute of PathologyUniversity of WürzburgWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations