Skip to main content

Negative for High-Grade Urothelial Carcinoma (NHGUC)

Abstract

All anatomic pathology terminology systems include one category to communicate that the patient has little, if any, risk of significant disease. Cytologic terminology systems conform to that convention, although identifying cellular criteria that fit into that category, can be challenging. The primary goal of The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (TPS) is to define changes that place the patient at significant risk for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC). TPS has adopted the philosophy that so long as a cause of cellular alterations can be identified and the cause is not life-threatening, and then the cellular sample belongs in the Negative for HGUC (NHGUC) category. Furthermore, changes suggesting low-grade urothelial neoplasia (LGUN) place the sample in the NHGUC category.

Keywords

  • Negative for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (NHGUC)
  • Benign urothelial
  • Squamous
  • Glandular cells
  • Benign urothelial tissue fragments
  • Reactive urothelial cells
  • Urolithiasis
  • Polyomavirus (BK)
  • Post-cystectomy treatment changes
  • Enteric epithelial cells
  • Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) reaction
  • Low-grade urothelial neoplasia (LGUN)

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-88686-8_3
  • Chapter length: 42 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-88686-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 3.1
Fig. 3.2
Fig. 3.3
Fig. 3.4
Fig. 3.5
Fig. 3.6
Fig. 3.7
Fig. 3.8
Fig. 3.9
Fig. 3.10
Fig. 3.11
Fig. 3.12
Fig. 3.13
Fig. 3.14
Fig. 3.15
Fig. 3.16
Fig. 3.17
Fig. 3.18
Fig. 3.19
Fig. 3.20
Fig. 3.21
Fig. 3.22
Fig. 3.23
Fig. 3.24
Fig. 3.25
Fig. 3.26
Fig. 3.27
Fig. 3.28

References

  1. Rosenthal DL, Vandenbussche CJ, Burroughs FH, Sathiyamoorthy S, Guan H, Owens C. The Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples: part I-creating the template. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013;121:15–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wojcik EM. What should not be reported as atypia in urine cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4:30–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Harris MJ, Schwinn CP, Morrow JW, Gray RL, Browell BM. Exfoliative cytology of the urinary bladder irrigation specimen. Acta Cytol. 1971;15:385–99.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hughes JH, Raab SS, Cohen MB. The cytologic diagnosis of low-grade transitional cell carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114(Suppl):59.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Raab SS, Slagel DD, Jensen CS, Teague MW, Savell VH, Ozkutlu D, Lenel JC, Cohen MB. Low-grade transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: application of select cytologic criteria to improve diagnostic accuracy [corrected]. Mod Pathol. 1996;9:225–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Raab SS, Lenel JC, Cohen MB. Low grade transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Cytologic diagnosis by key features as identified by logistic regression analysis. Cancer. 1994;74:1621–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Barkan GA, Wojcik EM. Genitourinary cytopathology (kidney and urinary tract). Cancer Treat Res. 2014;160:149–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wojcik EM, Brownlie RJ, Bassler TJ, Miller MC. Superficial urothelial (umbrella) cells. A potential cause of abnormal DNA ploidy results in urine specimens. Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 2000;22:411–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhou AG, Hutchinson LM, Cosar EF. Urine cytopathology and ancillary methods. Surg Pathol Clin. 2014;7(1):77–88.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Reynolds JP, Voss JS, Kipp BR, Karnes RJ, Nassar A, Clayton AC, Henry MR, Sebo TJ, Zhang J, Halling KC. Comparison of urine cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization in upper urothelial tract samples. Cancer Cytopathol. 2014;122:459–67.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tapia C, Glatz K, Obermann EC, Grilli B, Barascud A, Herzog M, Schonegg R, Savic S, Bubendorf L. Evaluation of chromosomal aberrations in patients with benign conditions and reactive changes in urinary cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011;119(6):404–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bullock PS, Thoni DE, Murphy WM. The significance of colonic mucosa (intestinal metaplasia) involving the urinary tract. Cancer. 1987;59(12):2086–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cowan ML, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Improved risk stratification for patients with high-grade urothelial carcinoma following application of the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2017;125(6):427–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frost JK. Concepts basic to general cytopathology. 4th ed. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Layfield LJ, Elsheikh TM, Fili A, Nayar R, Shidham V. Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology: review of the state of the art and recommendations of the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology for urinary cytology procedures and reporting : the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology Practice Guidelines Task Force. Diagn Cytopathol. 2004;30(1):24–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Renshaw AA. Compassionate conservatism in urinary cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;22(3):137–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Renshaw AA, Nappi D, Weinberg DS. Cytology of grade 1 papillary transitional cell carcinoma. A comparison of cytologic, architectural and morphometric criteria in cystoscopically obtained urine. Acta Cytol. 1996;40(4):676–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang ML, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. The cytomorphological features of low-grade urothelial neoplasms vary by specimen type. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(8):552–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low rates of urothelial neoplasia. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015;123(3):180–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Atypical urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low but significantly higher rates of urothelial neoplasia than benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015;123(3):186–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. McCroskey Z, Kliethermes S, Bahar B, Barkan GA, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM. Is a consistent cytologic diagnosis of low-grade urothelial carcinoma in instrumented urinary tract cytologic specimens possible? A comparison between cytomorphologic features of low-grade urothelial carcinoma and non-neoplastic changes shows extensive overlap, making a reliable diagnosis impossible. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4(2):90–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang ML, Zhou AG, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Urinary tract washing specimens containing atypical urothelial tissue fragments are significantly associated with urothelial neoplasia. Diagn Cytopathol. 2017;45(9):795–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Blacher EJ. Squamous cell carcinoma of renal pelvis. Urology. 1985:124–6.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Li MK, Cheung WL. Squamous cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis. J Urol. 1987;138(2):269–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pinto M, Dobson S. BK and JC virus: a review. J Infect. 2014;68(Suppl 1):2.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Paquette C, Elhosseiny A. Significance of polyomavirus detection in urine cytology: an update. Diagn Histopathol. 2012;18:321–6.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Koss LG. On decoy cells. Acta Cytol. 2005;49:233–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wojcik EM, Miller MC, Wright BC, Veltri RW, O’Dowd GJ. Comparative analysis of DNA content in polyomavirus-infected urothelial cells, urothelial dysplasia and high grade transitional cell carcinoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 1997;19:430–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bakhos R, Shankey TV, Flanigan RC, Fisher S, Wojcik EM. Comparative analysis of DNA flow cytometry and cytology of bladder washings: review of discordant cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;22:65–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Halling KC, Kipp BR. Bladder cancer detection using FISH (UroVysion assay). Adv Anat Pathol. 2008;15:279–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Galed-Placed I, Valbuena-Ruvira L. Decoy cells and malignant cells coexisting in the urine from a transplant recipient with BK virus nephropathy and bladder adenocarcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39:933–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Geetha D, Tong BC, Racusen L, Markowitz JS, Westra WH. Bladder carcinoma in a transplant recipient: evidence to implicate the BK human polyomavirus as a causal transforming agent. Transplantation. 2002;73(12):1933–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lu H, Elsheikh TM, Zhang Y. Polyomavirus (BK) cytopathic effect in urine cytology is not associated with high risk of developing high-grade urothelial carcinoma. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2020;9(2):84–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Allison DB, Olson MT, Lilo M, Zhang ML, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Should the BK polyomavirus cytopathic effect be best classified as atypical or benign in urine cytology specimens? Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(6):436–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Martinez-Giron R, Esteban-Sanchis JG. Parasite eggs in urine cytology: fact or artifact? Diagn Cytopathol. 2009;37(5):353–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Talar-Williams C, Hijazi YM, Walther MM, Linehan WM, Hallahan CW, Lubensky I, Kerr GS, Hoffman GS, Fauci AS, Sneller MC. Cyclophosphamide-induced cystitis and bladder cancer in patients with Wegener granulomatosis. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124(5):477–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Knight A, Askling J, Granath F, Sparen P, Ekbom A. Urinary bladder cancer in Wegener's granulomatosis: risks and relation to cyclophosphamide. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(10):1307–11.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Pierconti F, Rossi ED, Straccia P, Fadda G, Larocca LM, Bassi PF, Sacco E, Schinzari G. The risk of malignancy of atypical urothelial cells of undetermined significance in patients treated with chemohyperthermia or electromotive drug administration. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018;126(3):200–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Garret M, Hamm FC. Atypical cells of origin from the seminal vesicles, complicating cytologic evaluation of prostatic secretions. Am J Clin Pathol. 1963;39:265–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Terada T. Monstrous epithelial cell clusters in the seminal vesicle. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2011;4(7):727–30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Wojcik EM, Bassler TJ, Orozco R. DNA ploidy in seminal vesicle cells. A potential diagnostic pitfall in urine cytology. Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 1999;21(1):29–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Cimino-Mathews A, Ali SZ. The clinicopathologic correlates of cellular atypia in urinary cytology of ileal neobladders. Acta Cytol. 2011;55(5):449–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Nomani L, Abro S, Quek ML, Barkan GA. Guar bean in urinary cytology: a morphologic pitfall. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021;10(1):41–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ali-El-Dein B, El-Tabey N, Abdel-Latif M, Abdel-Rahim M, El-Bahnasawy M. Late uro-ileal cancer after incorporation of ileum into the urinary tract. J Urol. 2002;167:84–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Brimo F, Vollmer RT, Case B, Aprikian A, Kassouf W, Auger M. Accuracy of urine cytology and the significance of an atypical category. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132:785–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Raab SS, Grzybicki DM, Vrbin CM, Geisinger KR. Urine cytology discrepancies: frequency, causes, and outcomes. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;127:946–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. McIntire PJ, Khan R, Hussain H, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM, Barkan GA. Negative predictive value and sensitivity of urine cytology prior to implementation of The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2019;127(2):125–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. McIntire PJ, Kilic I, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM, Barkan GA. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology reduces atypia rates and does not alter the negative predictive value of urine cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021;10(1):14–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ajit D, Dighe SB, Desai SB. Cytology of lleal conduit urine in bladder cancer patients: diagnostic utility and pitfalls. Acta Cytol. 2006;50:70–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Cimino-Mathews A, Ali SZ. The clinicopathologic correlates of cellular atypia in urinary cytology of ileal neobladders. Acta Cytol. 2011;55:449–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher J. VandenBussche .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

VandenBussche, C.J. et al. (2022). Negative for High-Grade Urothelial Carcinoma (NHGUC). In: Wojcik, E.M., Kurtycz, D.F., Rosenthal, D.L. (eds) The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88686-8_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88686-8_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-88685-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-88686-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)