The pathology of bladder cancer

Victor E. Reuter, H. Barton Grossman, Michael L. Blute, Mark S. Soloway, Colin P N Dinney, Louis S. Liou, J. Stephen Jones

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Pathologists play an important role in the management of urinary bladder cancer by making a careful morphologic assessment of the primary tumor and its relation to adjacent structures. Ideally, evaluation of the primary site will segregate patients into groups with distinct clinical features, biologic behavior, and response to therapy. Traditionally, to accomplish this goal, pathologists have relied on factors such as histologic tumor type, grade, depth of invasion, and presence or absence of vascular invasion. Recently, in an effort to enhance our ability to subclassify these patients, we have introduced new modalities, such as flow cytometry, monoclonal antibodies, assessment of proliferative rate, and cytogenetics and molecular genetics. Without question we are advancing into an era in which tumors will be classified based on their molecular "fingerprint." Nevertheless, at this time, morphology remains the "gold standard" and, consequently, the best tool to assess the biologic potential of early bladder cancer. Despite this undeniable fact, there are many problems with the pathologic evaluation of these tumors, mostly because of the inherent subjectivity of the field and the lack of universal, standardized criteria for the evaluation of the above-mentioned morphologic parameters. Publications in peer-reviewed journals and the proliferation of educational opportunities by way of seminars, conferences, and web-based tutorials play an important role in keeping the practicing pathologist informed and up to date. As novel concepts and modern techniques are reported, their clinical value must be validated prospectively. Expert pathology review and establishment of exportable practice standards play an important role in the process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11-18
Number of pages8
JournalUrology
Volume67
Issue number3 SUPPL. 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
Pathology
Neoplasms
Dermatoglyphics
Cytogenetics
Blood Vessels
Publications
Molecular Biology
Flow Cytometry
Monoclonal Antibodies
Pathologists
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Reuter, V. E., Grossman, H. B., Blute, M. L., Soloway, M. S., Dinney, C. P. N., Liou, L. S., & Jones, J. S. (2006). The pathology of bladder cancer. Urology, 67(3 SUPPL. 1), 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.037

The pathology of bladder cancer. / Reuter, Victor E.; Grossman, H. Barton; Blute, Michael L.; Soloway, Mark S.; Dinney, Colin P N; Liou, Louis S.; Jones, J. Stephen.

In: Urology, Vol. 67, No. 3 SUPPL. 1, 01.03.2006, p. 11-18.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Reuter, VE, Grossman, HB, Blute, ML, Soloway, MS, Dinney, CPN, Liou, LS & Jones, JS 2006, 'The pathology of bladder cancer', Urology, vol. 67, no. 3 SUPPL. 1, pp. 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.037
Reuter VE, Grossman HB, Blute ML, Soloway MS, Dinney CPN, Liou LS et al. The pathology of bladder cancer. Urology. 2006 Mar 1;67(3 SUPPL. 1):11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.037
Reuter, Victor E. ; Grossman, H. Barton ; Blute, Michael L. ; Soloway, Mark S. ; Dinney, Colin P N ; Liou, Louis S. ; Jones, J. Stephen. / The pathology of bladder cancer. In: Urology. 2006 ; Vol. 67, No. 3 SUPPL. 1. pp. 11-18.
@article{3c4135699cfc41afb3b1206cce6a5d97,
title = "The pathology of bladder cancer",
abstract = "Pathologists play an important role in the management of urinary bladder cancer by making a careful morphologic assessment of the primary tumor and its relation to adjacent structures. Ideally, evaluation of the primary site will segregate patients into groups with distinct clinical features, biologic behavior, and response to therapy. Traditionally, to accomplish this goal, pathologists have relied on factors such as histologic tumor type, grade, depth of invasion, and presence or absence of vascular invasion. Recently, in an effort to enhance our ability to subclassify these patients, we have introduced new modalities, such as flow cytometry, monoclonal antibodies, assessment of proliferative rate, and cytogenetics and molecular genetics. Without question we are advancing into an era in which tumors will be classified based on their molecular {"}fingerprint.{"} Nevertheless, at this time, morphology remains the {"}gold standard{"} and, consequently, the best tool to assess the biologic potential of early bladder cancer. Despite this undeniable fact, there are many problems with the pathologic evaluation of these tumors, mostly because of the inherent subjectivity of the field and the lack of universal, standardized criteria for the evaluation of the above-mentioned morphologic parameters. Publications in peer-reviewed journals and the proliferation of educational opportunities by way of seminars, conferences, and web-based tutorials play an important role in keeping the practicing pathologist informed and up to date. As novel concepts and modern techniques are reported, their clinical value must be validated prospectively. Expert pathology review and establishment of exportable practice standards play an important role in the process.",
author = "Reuter, {Victor E.} and Grossman, {H. Barton} and Blute, {Michael L.} and Soloway, {Mark S.} and Dinney, {Colin P N} and Liou, {Louis S.} and Jones, {J. Stephen}",
year = "2006",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.037",
language = "English",
volume = "67",
pages = "11--18",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3 SUPPL. 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The pathology of bladder cancer

AU - Reuter, Victor E.

AU - Grossman, H. Barton

AU - Blute, Michael L.

AU - Soloway, Mark S.

AU - Dinney, Colin P N

AU - Liou, Louis S.

AU - Jones, J. Stephen

PY - 2006/3/1

Y1 - 2006/3/1

N2 - Pathologists play an important role in the management of urinary bladder cancer by making a careful morphologic assessment of the primary tumor and its relation to adjacent structures. Ideally, evaluation of the primary site will segregate patients into groups with distinct clinical features, biologic behavior, and response to therapy. Traditionally, to accomplish this goal, pathologists have relied on factors such as histologic tumor type, grade, depth of invasion, and presence or absence of vascular invasion. Recently, in an effort to enhance our ability to subclassify these patients, we have introduced new modalities, such as flow cytometry, monoclonal antibodies, assessment of proliferative rate, and cytogenetics and molecular genetics. Without question we are advancing into an era in which tumors will be classified based on their molecular "fingerprint." Nevertheless, at this time, morphology remains the "gold standard" and, consequently, the best tool to assess the biologic potential of early bladder cancer. Despite this undeniable fact, there are many problems with the pathologic evaluation of these tumors, mostly because of the inherent subjectivity of the field and the lack of universal, standardized criteria for the evaluation of the above-mentioned morphologic parameters. Publications in peer-reviewed journals and the proliferation of educational opportunities by way of seminars, conferences, and web-based tutorials play an important role in keeping the practicing pathologist informed and up to date. As novel concepts and modern techniques are reported, their clinical value must be validated prospectively. Expert pathology review and establishment of exportable practice standards play an important role in the process.

AB - Pathologists play an important role in the management of urinary bladder cancer by making a careful morphologic assessment of the primary tumor and its relation to adjacent structures. Ideally, evaluation of the primary site will segregate patients into groups with distinct clinical features, biologic behavior, and response to therapy. Traditionally, to accomplish this goal, pathologists have relied on factors such as histologic tumor type, grade, depth of invasion, and presence or absence of vascular invasion. Recently, in an effort to enhance our ability to subclassify these patients, we have introduced new modalities, such as flow cytometry, monoclonal antibodies, assessment of proliferative rate, and cytogenetics and molecular genetics. Without question we are advancing into an era in which tumors will be classified based on their molecular "fingerprint." Nevertheless, at this time, morphology remains the "gold standard" and, consequently, the best tool to assess the biologic potential of early bladder cancer. Despite this undeniable fact, there are many problems with the pathologic evaluation of these tumors, mostly because of the inherent subjectivity of the field and the lack of universal, standardized criteria for the evaluation of the above-mentioned morphologic parameters. Publications in peer-reviewed journals and the proliferation of educational opportunities by way of seminars, conferences, and web-based tutorials play an important role in keeping the practicing pathologist informed and up to date. As novel concepts and modern techniques are reported, their clinical value must be validated prospectively. Expert pathology review and establishment of exportable practice standards play an important role in the process.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33644760437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33644760437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.037

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.037

M3 - Article

VL - 67

SP - 11

EP - 18

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 3 SUPPL. 1

ER -