10 results on '"Rous, Brian"'
Search Results
2. Sebaceous carcinoma epidemiology, associated malignancies and Lynch/Muir-Torre syndrome screening in England from 2008 to 2018
- Author
-
Cook, Sam, Pethick, Joanna, Kibbi, Nour, Hollestein, Loes, Lavelle, Katrina, de Vere Hunt, Isabella, Turnbull, Clare, Rous, Brian, Husain, Akhtar, Burn, John, Lüchtenborg, Margreet, Santaniello, Francesco, McRonald, Fiona, Hardy, Steven, Linos, Eleni, Venables, Zoe, Rajan, Neil, Cook, Sam, Pethick, Joanna, Kibbi, Nour, Hollestein, Loes, Lavelle, Katrina, de Vere Hunt, Isabella, Turnbull, Clare, Rous, Brian, Husain, Akhtar, Burn, John, Lüchtenborg, Margreet, Santaniello, Francesco, McRonald, Fiona, Hardy, Steven, Linos, Eleni, Venables, Zoe, and Rajan, Neil
- Abstract
Background: Sebaceous carcinomas (SC) may be associated with the cancer predisposition syndrome Muir-Torre/Lynch syndrome (MTS/LS), identifiable by SC mismatch repair (MMR) screening; however, there is limited data on MMR status of SC. Objective: To describe the epidemiology of SC, copresentation of other cancers, and population level frequency of MMR screening in SC. Methods: A population-based retrospective cohort study of SC patients in the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service in England. Results: This study included 1077 SC cases (739 extraocular, 338 periocular). Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIR) were higher in men compared with women, 2.74 (95% CI, 2.52-9.69) per 1,000,000 person-years for men versus 1.47 person-years (95% CI, 1.4-1.62) for women. Of the patients, 19% (210/1077) developed at least one MTS/LS-associated malignancy. MMR immunohistochemical screening was performed in only 20% (220/1077) of SC tumors; of these, 32% (70/219) of tumors were MMR deficient. Limitations: Retrospective design. Conclusions: Incorporation of MMR screening into clinical practice guidelines for the management of SC will increase the opportunity for MTS/LS diagnoses, with implications for cancer surveillance, chemoprevention with aspirin, and immunotherapy treatment targeted to MTS/LS cancers.
- Published
- 2023
3. Sex Differences in Survival from Neuroendocrine Neoplasia in England 2012–2018:A Retrospective, Population-Based Study
- Author
-
White, Benjamin E., Russell, Beth, Remmers, Sebastiaan, Rous, Brian, Chandrakumaran, Kandiah, Wong, Kwok F., Van Hemelrijck, Mieke, Srirajaskanthan, Rajaventhan, Ramage, John K., White, Benjamin E., Russell, Beth, Remmers, Sebastiaan, Rous, Brian, Chandrakumaran, Kandiah, Wong, Kwok F., Van Hemelrijck, Mieke, Srirajaskanthan, Rajaventhan, and Ramage, John K.
- Abstract
Pre-clinical studies have suggested sex hormone signalling pathways may influence tumorigenesis in neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN). We conducted a retrospective, population-based study to compare overall survival (OS) between males and females with NEN. A total of 14,834 cases of NEN diagnosed between 2012 and 2018, recorded in England’s National Cancer Registry and Analysis Service (NCRAS), were analysed. The primary outcome was OS with 5 years maximum follow-up. Multivariable analysis, restricted mean survival time and mediation analysis were performed. Appendiceal, pulmonary and early-stage NEN were most commonly diagnosed in females; stomach, pancreatic, small intestinal, colonic, rectal and later-stage NEN were more often diagnosed in males. Females displayed increased survival irrespective of the stage, morphology or level of deprivation. On average, they survived 3.62 (95% CI 1.73–5.90) to 10.26 (6.6–14.45) months longer than males; this was statistically significant in NEN of the lung, pancreas, rectum and stomach (p < 0.001). The stage mediated improved survival in stomach, lung, and pancreatic NEN but not in rectal NEN. The reasons underlying these differences are not yet understood. Overall, females diagnosed with NEN tend to survive longer than males, and the stage at presentation only partially explains this. Future research, as well as prognostication and treatment, should consider sex as an important factor.
- Published
- 2023
4. Validation of four cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma staging systems using nationwide data
- Author
-
Venables, Zoe Claire, Tokez, Selin, Hollestein, Loes M., Mooyaart, Antien L., van den Bos, Renate Ruth, Rous, Brian, Leigh, Irene M., Nijsten, Tamar, Wakkee, Marlies, Venables, Zoe Claire, Tokez, Selin, Hollestein, Loes M., Mooyaart, Antien L., van den Bos, Renate Ruth, Rous, Brian, Leigh, Irene M., Nijsten, Tamar, and Wakkee, Marlies
- Abstract
Background: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is the second most common cancer worldwide with relatively low metastatic potential (2–5%). Developments in therapeutic options have highlighted the need to better identify high-risk patients who could benefit from closer surveillance, adjuvant therapies and baseline/follow-up imaging, while at the same time safely omitting low-risk patients from further follow-up. Controversy remains regarding the predictive performance of current cSCC staging systems and which methodology to adopt. Objectives: To validate the performance of four cSCC staging systems [American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition (AJCC8), Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), Tübingen and Salamanca T3 refinement] in predicting metastasis using a nationwide cohort. Methods: A nested case–control study using data from the National Disease Registration Service, England, 2013–2015 was conducted. Metastatic cSCC cases were identified using an algorithm to identify all potential cases for manual review. These were 1 : 1 matched on follow-up time to nonmetastatic controls randomly selected from 2013. Staging systems were analysed for distinctiveness, homogeneity, monotonicity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and c-index. Results: We included 887 metastatic cSCC cases and 887 nonmetastatic cSCC controls. The BWH system showed the highest specificity [92.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 90.8–94.3%, PPV (13.2%, 95% CI 10.6–16.2) and c-index (0.84, 95% CI 0.82–0.86). The AJCC8 showed superior NPV (99.2%, 95% CI 99.2–99.3), homogeneity and monotonicity compared with the BWH and Tübingen diameter and thickness classifications (P < 0.001). Salamanca refinement did not show any improvement in AJCC8 T3 cSCC staging. Conclusions: We validated four cSCC staging systems using the largest nationwide dataset of metastatic cSCC so far. Although the BWH system showed the highest overall discriminative ability, PPV was
- Published
- 2022
5. Risk factors for metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma:Refinement and replication based on 2 nationwide nested case-control studies
- Author
-
Tokez, Selin, Venables, Zoe C., Hollestein, Loes M., Qi, Hongchao, Bramer, Edo M., Rentroia-Pacheco, Barbara, van den Bos, Renate R., Rous, Brian, Leigh, Irene M., Nijsten, Tamar, Mooyaart, Antien L., Wakkee, Marlies, Tokez, Selin, Venables, Zoe C., Hollestein, Loes M., Qi, Hongchao, Bramer, Edo M., Rentroia-Pacheco, Barbara, van den Bos, Renate R., Rous, Brian, Leigh, Irene M., Nijsten, Tamar, Mooyaart, Antien L., and Wakkee, Marlies
- Abstract
Background: Risk factors for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) metastasis have been investigated only in relatively small data sets. Objective: To analyze and replicate risk factors for metastatic cSCC. Methods: From English and Dutch nationwide cancer registry cohorts, metastatic cases were selected and 1:1 matched to controls. The variables were extracted from pathology reports from the National Disease Registration Service in England. In the Netherlands, histopathologic slides from the Dutch Pathology Registry were revised by a dermatopathologist. Model building was performed in the English data set using backward conditional logistic regression, whereas replication was performed using the Dutch data set. Results: In addition to diameter and thickness, the following variables were significant risk factors for metastatic cSCC in the English data set (n = 1774): poor differentiation (odds ratio [OR], 4.56; 95% CI, 2.99-6.94), invasion in (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.05-2.71)/beyond (OR, 4.43; 95% CI, 1.98-9.90) subcutaneous fat, male sex (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.70-3.96), perineural/lymphovascular invasion (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.21-3.71), and facial localization (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.02-2.41). Diameter and thickness showed significant nonlinear relationships with metastasis. Similar ORs were observed in the Dutch data set (n = 434 cSCCs). Limitations: Retrospective use of pathology reports in the English data set. Conclusion: cSCC staging systems can be improved by including differentiation, clinical characteristics such as sex and tumor location, and nonlinear relationships for diameter and thickness.
- Published
- 2022
6. Vet-ICD-O-Canine-1, a System for Coding Canine Neoplasms Based on the Human ICD-O-3.2
- Author
-
Pinello, Katia; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0870-6281, Baldassarre, Valeria; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1241-4297, Steiger, Katja; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7269-5433, Paciello, Orlando, Pires, Isabel; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6330-4560, Laufer-Amorim, Renée; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8653-7938, Oevermann, Anna; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3569-8547, Niza-Ribeiro, João, Aresu, Luca; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7893-1740, Rous, Brian; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7619-461X, Znaor, Ariana, Cree, Ian A, Guscetti, Franco; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3173-4811, Palmieri, Chiara; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5791-6066, Dagli, Maria Lucia Zaidan; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7031-6711, Pinello, Katia; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0870-6281, Baldassarre, Valeria; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1241-4297, Steiger, Katja; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7269-5433, Paciello, Orlando, Pires, Isabel; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6330-4560, Laufer-Amorim, Renée; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8653-7938, Oevermann, Anna; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3569-8547, Niza-Ribeiro, João, Aresu, Luca; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7893-1740, Rous, Brian; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7619-461X, Znaor, Ariana, Cree, Ian A, Guscetti, Franco; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3173-4811, Palmieri, Chiara; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5791-6066, and Dagli, Maria Lucia Zaidan; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7031-6711
- Abstract
Cancer registries are fundamental tools for collecting epidemiological cancer data and developing cancer prevention and control strategies. While cancer registration is common in the human medical field, many attempts to develop animal cancer registries have been launched over time, but most have been discontinued. A pivotal aspect of cancer registration is the availability of cancer coding systems, as provided by the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O). Within the Global Initiative for Veterinary Cancer Surveillance (GIVCS), established to foster and coordinate animal cancer registration worldwide, a group of veterinary pathologists and epidemiologists developed a comparative coding system for canine neoplasms. Vet-ICD-O-canine-1 is compatible with the human ICD-O-3.2 and is consistent with the currently recognized classification schemes for canine tumors. It comprises 335 topography codes and 534 morphology codes. The same code as in ICD-O-3.2 was used for the majority of canine tumors showing a high level of similarity to their human counterparts (n = 408). De novo codes (n = 152) were created for specific canine tumor entities (n = 126) and topographic sites (n = 26). The Vet-ICD-O-canine-1 coding system represents a user-friendly, easily accessible, and comprehensive resource for developing a canine cancer registration system that will enable studies within the One Health space.
- Published
- 2022
7. The histology of brain tumors for 67 331 children and 671 085 adults diagnosed in 60 countries during 2000-2014: a global, population-based study (CONCORD-3)
- Author
-
Girardi, Fabio;Rous, Brian;Stiller, Charles A;Gatta, Gemma;Fersht, Naomi;Storm, Hans H;Rodrigues, Jessica R;Herrmann, Christian;Marcos-Gragera, Rafael;Peris-Bonet, Rafael;Valkov, Mikhail;Weir, Hannah K;Woods, Ryan R;You, Hui;Cueva, Patricia A;De, Prithwish;Di Carlo, Veronica;Johannesen, Tom Børge;Lima, Carlos A;Lynch, Charles F;Coleman, Michel P;Allemani, Claudia;Bouzbid, S;Hamdi-Chérif, M;Zaidi, Z;Meguenni, K;Regagba, D;Bayo, S;Cheick Bougadari, T;Manraj, S S;Bendahhou, K;Ladipo, A;Ogunbiyi, O J;Ramaliba, T;Somdyala, N I M;Chaplin, M A;Moreno, F;Calabrano, G H;Espinola, S B;Carballo Quintero, B;Fita, R;Laspada, W D;Ibañez, S G;Lima, C A;Mafra da Costa, A;De Souza, P C F;Del Pino, K;Laporte, C;Curado, M P;de Oliveira, J C;Veneziano, C L A;Veneziano, D B;Latorre, M R D O;Tanaka, L F;Rebelo, M S;Santos, M O;Azevedo e Silva, G;Galaz, J C;Aparicio Aravena, M;Sanhueza Monsalve, J;Herrmann, D A;Vargas, S;Herrera, V M;Uribe, C J;Bravo, L E;Garcia, L S;Arias-Ortiz, N E;Morantes, D;Jurado, D M;Yépez Chamorro, M C;Delgado, S;Ramirez, M;Galán Alvarez, Y H;Torres, P;Martínez-Reyes, F;Jaramillo, L;Quinto, R;Castillo, J;Mendoza, M;Cueva, P;Yépez, J G;Bhakkan, B;Deloumeaux, J;Joachim, C;Macni, J;Carrillo, R;Shalkow Klincovstein, J;Rivera Gomez, R;Perez, P;Poquioma, E;Tortolero-Luna, G;Zavala, D;Alonso, R;Barrios, E;Eckstrand, A;Nikiforuk, C;Woods, R R;Noonan, G;Turner, D;Kumar, E;Zhang, B;McCrate, F R;Ryan, S;MacIntyre, M;Saint-Jacques, N;Anam, A;De, P;McClure, C A;Vriends, K A;Bertrand, C;Latreille, J;Kozie, S;Stuart-Panko, H;Freeman, T;George, J T;Avila, R M;O’Brien, D K;Holt, A;Almon, L;Kwong, S;Morris, C;Rycroft, R;Mueller, L;Phillips, C E;Brown, H;Cromartie, B;Schwartz, A G;Vigneau, F;Levin, G M;Wohler, B;Bayakly, R;Ward, K C;Gomez, S L;McKinley, M;Cress, R;Green, M D;Miyagi, K;Johnson, C J;Ruppert, L P;Bentler, S;Charlton, M E;Huang, B;Tucker, T C;Deapen, D;Liu, L;Hsieh, M C;Wu, X C;Schwenn, M;Stern, K;Gershman, S T;Knowlton, R C;Alverson, G;Weaver, T;Bushhouse, S;Rogers, D and Girardi, Fabio;Rous, Brian;Stiller, Charles A;Gatta, Gemma;Fersht, Naomi;Storm, Hans H;Rodrigues, Jessica R;Herrmann, Christian;Marcos-Gragera, Rafael;Peris-Bonet, Rafael;Valkov, Mikhail;Weir, Hannah K;Woods, Ryan R;You, Hui;Cueva, Patricia A;De, Prithwish;Di Carlo, Veronica;Johannesen, Tom Børge;Lima, Carlos A;Lynch, Charles F;Coleman, Michel P;Allemani, Claudia;Bouzbid, S;Hamdi-Chérif, M;Zaidi, Z;Meguenni, K;Regagba, D;Bayo, S;Cheick Bougadari, T;Manraj, S S;Bendahhou, K;Ladipo, A;Ogunbiyi, O J;Ramaliba, T;Somdyala, N I M;Chaplin, M A;Moreno, F;Calabrano, G H;Espinola, S B;Carballo Quintero, B;Fita, R;Laspada, W D;Ibañez, S G;Lima, C A;Mafra da Costa, A;De Souza, P C F;Del Pino, K;Laporte, C;Curado, M P;de Oliveira, J C;Veneziano, C L A;Veneziano, D B;Latorre, M R D O;Tanaka, L F;Rebelo, M S;Santos, M O;Azevedo e Silva, G;Galaz, J C;Aparicio Aravena, M;Sanhueza Monsalve, J;Herrmann, D A;Vargas, S;Herrera, V M;Uribe, C J;Bravo, L E;Garcia, L S;Arias-Ortiz, N E;Morantes, D;Jurado, D M;Yépez Chamorro, M C;Delgado, S;Ramirez, M;Galán Alvarez, Y H;Torres, P;Martínez-Reyes, F;Jaramillo, L;Quinto, R;Castillo, J;Mendoza, M;Cueva, P;Yépez, J G;Bhakkan, B;Deloumeaux, J;Joachim, C;Macni, J;Carrillo, R;Shalkow Klincovstein, J;Rivera Gomez, R;Perez, P;Poquioma, E;Tortolero-Luna, G;Zavala, D;Alonso, R;Barrios, E;Eckstrand, A;Nikiforuk, C;Woods, R R;Noonan, G;Turner, D;Kumar, E;Zhang, B;McCrate, F R;Ryan, S;MacIntyre, M;Saint-Jacques, N;Anam, A;De, P;McClure, C A;Vriends, K A;Bertrand, C;Latreille, J;Kozie, S;Stuart-Panko, H;Freeman, T;George, J T;Avila, R M;O’Brien, D K;Holt, A;Almon, L;Kwong, S;Morris, C;Rycroft, R;Mueller, L;Phillips, C E;Brown, H;Cromartie, B;Schwartz, A G;Vigneau, F;Levin, G M;Wohler, B;Bayakly, R;Ward, K C;Gomez, S L;McKinley, M;Cress, R;Green, M D;Miyagi, K;Johnson, C J;Ruppert, L P;Bentler, S;Charlton, M E;Huang, B;Tucker, T C;Deapen, D;Liu, L;Hsieh, M C;Wu, X C;Schwenn, M;Stern, K;Gershman, S T;Knowlton, R C;Alverson, G;Weaver, T;Bushhouse, S;Rogers, D
- Published
- 2020
8. cIMPACT-NOW update 6: new entity and diagnostic principle recommendations of the cIMPACT-Utrecht meeting on future CNS tumor classification and grading.
- Author
-
Louis, David N, Louis, David N, Wesseling, Pieter, Aldape, Kenneth, Brat, Daniel J, Capper, David, Cree, Ian A, Eberhart, Charles, Figarella-Branger, Dominique, Fouladi, Maryam, Fuller, Gregory N, Giannini, Caterina, Haberler, Christine, Hawkins, Cynthia, Komori, Takashi, Kros, Johan M, Ng, HK, Orr, Brent A, Park, Sung-Hye, Paulus, Werner, Perry, Arie, Pietsch, Torsten, Reifenberger, Guido, Rosenblum, Marc, Rous, Brian, Sahm, Felix, Sarkar, Chitra, Solomon, David A, Tabori, Uri, van den Bent, Martin J, von Deimling, Andreas, Weller, Michael, White, Valerie A, Ellison, David W, Louis, David N, Louis, David N, Wesseling, Pieter, Aldape, Kenneth, Brat, Daniel J, Capper, David, Cree, Ian A, Eberhart, Charles, Figarella-Branger, Dominique, Fouladi, Maryam, Fuller, Gregory N, Giannini, Caterina, Haberler, Christine, Hawkins, Cynthia, Komori, Takashi, Kros, Johan M, Ng, HK, Orr, Brent A, Park, Sung-Hye, Paulus, Werner, Perry, Arie, Pietsch, Torsten, Reifenberger, Guido, Rosenblum, Marc, Rous, Brian, Sahm, Felix, Sarkar, Chitra, Solomon, David A, Tabori, Uri, van den Bent, Martin J, von Deimling, Andreas, Weller, Michael, White, Valerie A, and Ellison, David W
- Abstract
cIMPACT-NOW (the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy) was established to evaluate and make practical recommendations on recent advances in the field of CNS tumor classification, particularly in light of the rapid progress in molecular insights into these neoplasms. For Round 2 of its deliberations, cIMPACT-NOW Working Committee 3 was reconstituted and convened in Utrecht, The Netherlands, for a meeting designed to review putative new CNS tumor types in advance of any future World Health Organization meeting on CNS tumor classification. In preparatory activities for the meeting and at the actual meeting, a list of possible entities was assembled and each type and subtype debated. Working Committee 3 recommended that a substantial number of newly recognized types and subtypes should be considered for inclusion in future CNS tumor classifications. In addition, the group endorsed a number of principles-relating to classification categories, approaches to classification, nomenclature, and grading-that the group hopes will also inform the future classification of CNS neoplasms.
- Published
- 2020
9. Global Consultation on Cancer Staging: promoting consistent understanding and use
- Author
-
Brierley, James; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6944-8394, O'Sullivan, Brian, Asamura, Hisao, Byrd, David, Huang, Shao Hui, Lee, Anne, Piñeros, Marion, Mason, Malcolm, Moraes, Fabio Y, Rösler, Wiebke, Rous, Brian, Torode, Julie, van Krieken, J Han, Gospodarowicz, Mary, Brierley, James; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6944-8394, O'Sullivan, Brian, Asamura, Hisao, Byrd, David, Huang, Shao Hui, Lee, Anne, Piñeros, Marion, Mason, Malcolm, Moraes, Fabio Y, Rösler, Wiebke, Rous, Brian, Torode, Julie, van Krieken, J Han, and Gospodarowicz, Mary
- Abstract
Disease burden is the most important determinant of survival in patients with cancer. This domain, reflected by the cancer stage and codified using the tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) classification, is a fundamental determinant of prognosis. Accurate and consistent tumour classification is required for the development and use of treatment guidelines and to enable clinical research (including clinical trials), cancer surveillance and control. Furthermore, knowledge of the extent and stage of disease is frequently important in the context of translational studies. Attempts to include additional prognostic factors in staging classifications, in order to facilitate a more accurate determination of prognosis, are often made with a lack of knowledge and understanding and are one of the main causes of the inconsistent use of terms and definitions. This effect has resulted in uncertainty and confusion, thus limiting the utility of the TNM classification. In this Position paper, we provide a consensus on the optimal use and terminology for cancer staging that emerged from a consultation process involving representatives of several major international organizations involved in cancer classification. The consultation involved several steps: a focused literature review; a stakeholder survey; and a consultation meeting. This aim of this Position paper is to provide a consensus that should guide the use of staging terminology and secure the classification of anatomical disease extent as a distinct aspect of cancer classification.
- Published
- 2019
10. A common classification framework for neuroendocrine neoplasms: an International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and World Health Organization (WHO) expert consensus proposal
- Author
-
Rindi, Guido, Klimstra, David S., Abedi-Ardekani, Behnoush, Asa, Sylvia L., Bosman, Frederik T., Brambilla, Elisabeth, Busam, Klaus J., de Krijger, Ronald R., Dietel, Manfred, El-Naggar, Adel K., Fernandez-Cuesta, Lynnette, Klöppel, Günter, Mccluggage, W. Glenn, Moch, Holger, Ohgaki, Hiroko, Rakha, Emad A., Reed, Nicholas S., Rous, Brian A., Sasano, Hironobu, Scarpa, Aldo, Scoazec, Jean-Yve, Travis, William D., Tallini, Giovanni, Trouillas, Jacqueline, van Krieken, J. Han, Cree, Ian A., Rindi, Guido (ORCID:0000-0003-2996-4404), Rindi, Guido, Klimstra, David S., Abedi-Ardekani, Behnoush, Asa, Sylvia L., Bosman, Frederik T., Brambilla, Elisabeth, Busam, Klaus J., de Krijger, Ronald R., Dietel, Manfred, El-Naggar, Adel K., Fernandez-Cuesta, Lynnette, Klöppel, Günter, Mccluggage, W. Glenn, Moch, Holger, Ohgaki, Hiroko, Rakha, Emad A., Reed, Nicholas S., Rous, Brian A., Sasano, Hironobu, Scarpa, Aldo, Scoazec, Jean-Yve, Travis, William D., Tallini, Giovanni, Trouillas, Jacqueline, van Krieken, J. Han, Cree, Ian A., and Rindi, Guido (ORCID:0000-0003-2996-4404)
- Abstract
The classification of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) differs between organ systems and currently causes considerable confusion. A uniform classification framework for NENs at any anatomical location may reduce inconsistencies and contradictions among the various systems currently in use. The classification suggested here is intended to allow pathologists and clinicians to manage their patients with NENs consistently, while acknowledging organ-specific differences in classification criteria, tumor biology, and prognostic factors. The classification suggested is based on a consensus conference held at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in November 2017 and subsequent discussion with additional experts. The key feature of the new classification is a distinction between differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), also designated carcinoid tumors in some systems, and poorly differentiated NECs, as they both share common expression of neuroendocrine markers. This dichotomous morphological subdivision into NETs and NECs is supported by genetic evidence at specific anatomic sites as well as clinical, epidemiologic, histologic, and prognostic differences. In many organ systems, NETs are graded as G1, G2, or G3 based on mitotic count and/or Ki-67 labeling index, and/or the presence of necrosis; NECs are considered high grade by definition. We believe this conceptual approach can form the basis for the next generation of NEN classifications and will allow more consistent taxonomy to understand how neoplasms from different organ systems inter-relate clinically and genetically.
- Published
- 2018
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.