Abstract

Aim: Our aim was to compare the interobserver variability between the 1998 WHO/ISUP and 1973 WHO classifications. Methods: 258 consecutive papillary urothelial carcinomas were reviewed by two pathologists and assigned a tumor grade according to the 1973 WHO and 1998 WHO/ISUP without the knowledge of primary diagnosis and clinical follow-up. All cases were also histologically staged by the two pathologists separately as follows: pTa (noninvasive), pT1 (lamina propria invasion only), pT2 (muscularis propria invasion). Findings of both pathologists and degree of agreement were compared statistically by using Pearson’s χ<sup>2</sup> test and ĸ statistics respectively. A ĸ value of 0.21–0.40 is accepted as fair, 0.41–0.60 moderate and 0.61–0.80 substantial agreement. Results: Regardless of the pathologist, tumor grades of two classifications correlated to each other and the pathological stage (p < 0.05). Overall degree of agreement between pathologists was higher in the 1998 WHO/ISUP (ĸ 0.59) than the 1973 WHO (ĸ 0.41), but both were still moderate. Papillary urothelial neoplasia with low malignant potential was the group of 1998 WHO/ISUP that showed the lowest degree of agreement and if excluded, interobserver variability of the 1998 WHO/ISUP decreased significantly (ĸ 0.84). Conclusion: The diagnosis of papillary urothelial neoplasia with low malignant potential and the criteria that differentiates it from low-grade carcinomas needs improvement in order to compare the different studies and therapies and to provide more accurate information for management.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.