Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25431236›Full record

ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2015

Molecular and clinical support for a four-tiered grading system for bladder cancer based on the WHO 1973 and 2004 classifications.

Bas W G van Rhijn, Mireia Musquera, Liyang Liu, André N Vis, Tahlita C M Zuiverloon, Geert J L H van Leenders, Wim J Kirkels, Ellen C Zwarthoff, Egbert R Boevé, Adriaan C Jöbsis and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Can We Foresee Grade and Stage Progression in Mixed Low- and High-Grade Noninvasive Papillary Urothelial Carcinomas?APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. LINC00312 inhibits the migration and invasion of bladder cancer cells by targeting miR-197-3p.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Squamous differentiation and prognosis in upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Bas W G van Rhijn1] Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada [2] Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands [3] Department of Cancer Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada [4] Department of Urology, Sint Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Mireia MusqueraDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Liyang LiuDepartment of Cancer Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
André N Vis1] Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands [2] Department of Urology, Sint Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Tahlita C M Zuiverloon1] Department of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands [2] Department of Pathology, Josephine Nefkens Institute, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Geert J L H van LeendersDepartment of Pathology, Josephine Nefkens Institute, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Wim J KirkelsDepartment of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ellen C ZwarthoffDepartment of Pathology, Josephine Nefkens Institute, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Egbert R BoevéDepartment of Urology, Sint Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Adriaan C JöbsisDepartment of Pathology, Sint Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Bharati BapatDepartment of Cancer Genetics, Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Michael A S JewettDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Alexandre R Zlotta1] Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada [2] Department of Urology, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Theo H van der Kwast1] Department of Pathology, Josephine Nefkens Institute, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands [2] Department of Surgical Pathology, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, the use of two classification systems for bladder cancer grade is advocated in clinical guidelines because the WHO2004 classification has not been sufficiently validated with biological markers and follow-up. The slides of 325 primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancers from three hospitals were reviewed by one uro-pathologist in two separate sessions for the WHO1973 (G1, G2 and G3) and 2004 (papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (LMP), low-grade (LG) and high-grade (HG)) classifications. FGFR3 status was examined with PCR-SNaPshot analysis. Expression of Ki-67, P53 and P27 was analyzed by immuno-histochemistry. Clinical recurrence and progression were determined. We performed validation and cross-validation of the two systems for grade with molecular markers and clinical outcome. Multivariable analyses were done to predict prognosis and pT1 bladder cancer. Grade review resulted in 88 G1, 149 G2 and 88 G3 lesions (WHO1973) and 79 LMP, 101 LG and 145 HG lesions (WHO2004). Molecular validation of both grading systems showed that FGFR3 mutations were associated with lower grades whereas altered expression (Ki-67, P53 and P27) was found in higher grades. Clinical validation showed that the two classification systems were both significant predictors for progression but not for recurrence. Cross-validation of both WHO systems showed a significant stepwise increase in biological (molecular markers) and clinical (progression) potential along the line: G1-LG-G2-HG-G3. The LMP and G1 categories had a similar clinical and molecular profile. On the basis of molecular biology and multivariable clinical data, our results support a four-tiered grading system using the 1973 and 2004 WHO classifications with one low-grade (LMP/LG/G1) category that includes LMP, two intermediate grade (LG/G2 and HG/G2) categories and one high-grade (HG/G3) category.

Indexed as

AgedCarcinoma, Transitional CellDNA Mutational AnalysisFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingPolymerase Chain ReactionReceptor, Fibroblast Growth Factor, Type 3Urinary Bladder NeoplasmsWorld Health OrganizationFGFR3 protein, humanReceptor, Fibroblast Growth Factor, Type 3

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.