The Importance of Being Grade 3: A Plea for a Three-tier Hybrid Classification System for Grade in Primary Non–muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer.

We recommend the stratification of high-grade (HG) non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer into HG/G2 and HG/G3, as patients with HG/G3 have worse prognosis than those with HG/G2. A Hybrid grading system (categories: low grade, HG/G2, and HG/G3) outperforms the current World Health Organization 2004/2016 system. Grade is an important determinant of progression in non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Although the World Health Organization (WHO) 2004/2016 grading system is recommended, other systems such as WHO1973 and WHO1999 are still widely used. Recently, a hybrid (three-tier) system was proposed, separating WHO2004/2016 high grade (HG) into HG/grade 2 (G2) and HG/G3 while maintaining low grade. We assessed the prognostic performance of HG/G3 and HG/G2. Three independent cohorts with 9712 primary (first diagnosis) Ta-T1 bladder tumors were analyzed. Time to progression was analyzed with cumulative incidence functions and Cox regression models. Harrell's C-index was used to assess discrimination. Time to progression was significantly shorter for HG/G3 than for HG/G2 in multivariable analyses (cohort 1: hazard ratio [HR] = 1.92; cohort 2: HR = 2.51, and cohort 3: HR = 1.69). Corresponding progression risks at 5 yr were 18%, 20%, and 18% for HG/G3 versus 7.3%, 7.5%, and 9.3% for HG/G2, respectively. Cox models using hybrid grade performed better than models with WHO2004/2016 (all cohorts; p < 0.001). For the three cohorts, C-indices for WHO2004/2016 were 0.69, 0.62, and 0.75, while, for hybrid grade, C-indices were 0.74, 0.68, and 0.78, respectively. Subdividing the HG category into HG/G2 and HG/G3 stratifies time to progression and supports the recommendation to adopt the hybrid grading system for Ta/T1 bladder cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]