Atypical Category of the Johns Hopkins Template Has Higher Risk of Malignancy than the Paris System but the Paris System Is More Applicable for Suspicious Category

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply

Start free trial

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Abstract of Nongynecologic Cytopathology

Received: August 24, 2022
Accepted: January 18, 2023
Published online: February 02, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 9
Number of Figures: 3
Number of Tables: 6

ISSN: 0001-5547 (Print)
eISSN: 1938-2650 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ACY

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare performance of individual categories between the Johns Hopkins template and the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology. Methods: Medical records of patients with bladder biopsy and relevant cytology slides were obtained from archived material. Slides were reclassified according to Johns Hopkins template and the Paris system. Results were compared to histological diagnoses. Results: BD SurePath preparations from 205 cases with biopsy follow-up (118 benign, 5 dysplasia, 23 low, and 59 malignant urothelial carcinoma [UC]) were reviewed. There were 2 inadequate specimens in each system. According to the Johns Hopkins template, there were 96 (46.8%) no urothelial atypia or malignancy, 37 (18%) atypical urothelial cells of uncertain significance (AUC-US), 21 (10.2%) atypical urothelial cells, cannot exclude high-grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC), 38 (18.5%) HGUC, and 11 (5.4%) low-grade urothelial carcinoma (LGUC). The Paris system categorized 111 (54.1%) negative for high-grade urothelial carcinoma, 29 (14.1%) atypical urothelial cells (AUCs), 25 (12.2%) suspicious for HGUC (SHGUC), 36 (17.6%) HGUC, and 2 (1%) LGUC. The Johns Hopkins template had a sensitivity of 95.6%, specificity of 73.6%, positive predictive value of 61.5%, negative predictive value of 96.3, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 79.8%. The Paris System had a sensitivity of 93.6%, specificity of 77.9%, positive predictive value of 65.6%, negative predictive value of 96.5, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 82.8%. The risk of malignancy (ROM) for atypical category (AUC-US/AUC) in the Johns Hopkins template was 43.2%, while it has been 24.1% for the Paris System. The ROM for suspicious category was 47.6% and 68.0%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between negative and atypical, suspicious, and HGUC categories in each system (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Discrete negative or benign urine cytology had the same sensitivity and specificity between two systems. Although atypical category was associated with a higher ROM with the Hopkins template, the ROM for the suspicious category yielded better result with the Paris system.

© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel

References Magiorkinis E, Diamantis A. The fascinating story of urine examination: from uroscopy to the era of microscopy and beyond. Diagn Cytopathol. 2015 Dec;43(12):1020–36. Owens CL, Vandenbussche CJ, Burroughs FH, Rosenthal DL. A review of reporting systems and terminology for urine cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013 Jan;121(1):9–14. Raitanen MP, Aine RAT, Kaasinen ES, Liukkonen TJO, Kylmala TM, Huhtala H, et al. Suspicious urine cytology (class III) in patients with bladder cancer: should it be considered as negative or positive? Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2002;36(3):213–7. Igarashi H, Ohishi Y, Onodera S, Ohnishi T, Yamazaki H, Tomita M, et al. Clinical study on urinary cytology in renal pelvic and ureteral tumors. Hinyokika Kiyo. 1996 Jul;42(7):493–6. Iwai S, Mimura A, Ohtani H, Shimokama T, Kinjo M. A new 7-point method facilitates accurate diagnosis of high-grade urothelial carcinoma in routine urinary cytology practice. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021;10(1):103–9. Chan E, Balassanian R, Tabatabai ZL, Lou H, Vohra P. Improved diagnostic precision of urine cytology by implementation of the Paris System and the use of cell blocks. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018 Sep;126(9):809–16. Glass R, Rosca O, Raab S, Szabelska J, Chau K, Sheikh-Fayyaz S, et al. Applying the Paris system for reporting urine cytology to challenging cytology cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 2019 Jul;47(7):675–81. Morency E, Antic T. Atypical urine cytology and the Johns Hopkins hospital template: the university of chicago experience. J Am Soc Cytopathol. Nov-Dec 2014;3(6):295–302. Wu HH, Redelman M, Chen S, Grignon DJ, Cramer HM. The application of the Johns Hopkins hospital template on urine cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2015 Aug;43(8):593–7, Piaton E, Advenier AS, Benaim G, Petrucci MD, Lechevallier FM, Ruffion A. [Atypical urothelial cells (AUC): a Bethesda-derived wording applicable to urinary cytopathology]. Ann Pathol. 2011 Feb;31(1):11–7. Rosenthal DL, Vandenbussche CJ, Burroughs FH, Sathiyamoorthy S, Guan H, Owens C. The Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples: part I-creating the template. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013 Jan;121(1):15–20. Barkan GA, Wojcik EM, Nayar R, Savic-Prince S, Quek ML, Kurtycz DFI, et al. The Paris system for reporting urinary cytology: the quest to develop a standardized terminology. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2016 May–Jun;5(3):177–88. L Chen, H He, MA Zarka, M Zhou, C Magi-Galluzzi .Upper tract urinary cytology to detect upper tract urothelial carcinoma: using the Johns Hopkins Hospital template and evaluation of its feasibility. Cytojournal. 2015 Jul 28;12:17. Hang JF, Charu V, Zhang ML, VandenBussche CJ. Digital image analysis supports a nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio cutoff value of 0.5 for atypical urothelial cells. Cancer Cytopathol. 2017 Sep;125(9):710–6. Zhang ML, Guo AX, VandenBussche CJ. Morphologists overestimate the nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016 Sep;124(9):669–77. Courtade-Saidi M, Cochand-Priollet B, Vielh P, Piaton E, Sous l’egide de la Societe Francaise de Cytologie Clinique. [A new terminology for urinary cytopathology: the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology (2015)]. Ann Pathol. 2019 Sep;39(5):344–51. Rohilla M, Singh P, Rajwanshi A, Gupta N, Srinivasan R, Dey P, et al. Cytohistological correlation of urine cytology in a tertiary centre with application of the Paris system. Cytopathology. 2018 Oct;29(5):436–43. Anbardar MH, Monjazeb R. Reclassification of urinary cytology regarding the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology with cytohistological correlation demonstrates high sensitivity for high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol. 2020 May;48(5):446–52. de Paula R, Oliveira A, Nunes W, Bovolim G, Domingos T, De Brot L, et al. Two-year study on the application of the Paris system for urinary cytology in a cancer centre. Cytopathology. 2020 Jan;31(1):41–6. Pastorello RG, Barkan GA, Saieg M. Experience on the use of the Paris system for reporting urinary cytopathology: review of the published literature. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021;10(1):79–87. Phruttinarakorn B, Plumworasawat S, Kayankarnnavee J, Lualon J, Pongtippan A. Application of the Paris reporting system for urine cytology: the three-year experience of a single tertiary care institute in Thailand. Acta Cytol. 2022;66(2):134–41. McIntire PJ, Kilic I, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM, Barkan GA. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology reduces atypia rates and does not alter the negative predictive value of urine cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021 Jan–Feb;10(1):14–9. Humphrey PA, Moch H, Cubilla AL, Ulbright TM, Reuter VE. The 2016 WHO classification of Tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs-Part B: prostate and bladder Tumours. Eur Urol. 2016 Jul;70(1):106–19. Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DFI, Rosenthal DL. We’ll always have Paris the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology 2022. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2022;11(2):62–6. Saginala K, Barsouk A, Aluru JS, Rawla P, Padala SA, Barsouk A. Epidemiology of bladder cancer. Med Sci. 2020 Mar 13;8(1):15. Andreassen BK, Aagnes B, Gislefoss R, Andreassen M, Wahlqvist R. Incidence and Survival of urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder in Norway 1981-2014. BMC Cancer. 2016 Oct 13;16(1):799. Olson MT, Novak A, Boonyaarunnate T, Trotter J, Sachs S, Kelly D, et al. Reproducibility of the Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2014 May–Jun;3(3):156–64. Onder S, Kurtulan O, Kavuncuoglu A, Akdogan B. Comparison of diagnostic performances of urine cytology before and after the use of the Paris system criteria: an institutional experience from Turkey. J Cytol. 2021Jul–Sep;38(3):133–9. Chandler JB, Colunga M, Celli R, Lithgow MY, Baldassarri RJ. Applicability of the Paris System for veterans: high rates of undiagnosed low-grade urothelial neoplasia. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021 Jul–Aug;10(4):357–65. Koss L, editors. Koss’s diagnostic cytology and its histopathological basis. 5th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2006. Zhang ML, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. The cytomorphological features of low-grade urothelial neoplasms vary by specimen type. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016 Aug;124(8):552–64. Jackson J, Barkan GA, Kapur U, Wojcik EM Cytologic and cystoscopic predictors of recurrence and progression in patients with low-grade urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013 Jul;121(7):398–402. Rohra P, Ocampo Gonzalez FA, Yan L, Mir F, Furlan K, Basu S, et al. Effect of the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology with histologic follow-up. Diagn Cytopathol. 2021 Jun;49(6):691–9. Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Atypical urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low but significantly higher rates of urothelial neoplasia than benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015 Mar;123(3):186–92. Granados R, Butron M, Santonja C, Rodriguez JM, Martin A, Duarte J, et al. Increased risk of malignancy for non-atypical urothelial cell groups compared to negative cytology in voided urine Morphological changes with LBC. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016 Jul;44(7):582–90. Glass R, Cocker R, Rosen L, Coutsouvelis C, Chau K, Slim F, et al. The impact of subdividing the “atypical” category for urinary cytology on patient management. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016 Jun;44(6):477–82. The Bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology. Defitions, criteria, and explanatory notes. In: Nayar R, Wilbur DC, editors. 3rd ed. Switzerland: Springer; 2015. Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DF. The Paris system for reporting urinary cytology. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. pp. 1–159. Layfield LJ, Esebua M, Frazier SR, Hammer RD, Bivin WW, Nguyen V, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of nuclear/cytoplasmic ratio assessments in urinary cytology specimens. Diagn Cytopathol. 2017 Feb;45(2):107–12. Sahai R, Rajkumar B, Joshi P, Singh A, Kumar A, Durgapal P, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of the Paris system of reporting urine cytology on cytocentrifuged samples. Diagn Cytopathol. 2020 Nov;48(11):979–85. Vosoughi A, Ordobazari A, Lora Gonzalez MA, Guido LP, Skiba M, Campuzano-Zuluaga G, et al. The Paris System “atypical urothelial cells” category: can the current criteria be improved? J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021 Jan–Feb;10(1):3–8. Celik B, Bulut T, Khoor A. Subtyping of non-small cell lung cancer by cytology specimens: a proposal for resource-poor hospitals. Cytojournal. 2019 Apr 22;16:8. VandenBussche CJ, Allison DB, Gupta M, Ali SZ, Rosenthal DL. A 20-year and 46,000-specimen journey to Paris reveals the influence of reporting systems and passive peer feedback on pathologist practice patterns. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018 Jun;126(6):381–9. Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Abstract of Nongynecologic Cytopathology

Received: August 24, 2022
Accepted: January 18, 2023
Published online: February 02, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 9
Number of Figures: 3
Number of Tables: 6

ISSN: 0001-5547 (Print)
eISSN: 1938-2650 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ACY

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif