Quantitative cytomorphological comparison of SurePath and ThinPrep liquid-based cytology using high-grade urothelial carcinoma cells.
SurePath
The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology
ThinPrep
high-grade urothelial carcinoma
liquid-based cytology
urine cytology
Journal
Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology
ISSN: 1365-2303
Titre abrégé: Cytopathology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9010345
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Sep 2021
Historique:
revised:
16
04
2021
received:
29
03
2021
accepted:
28
04
2021
pubmed:
26
5
2021
medline:
19
1
2022
entrez:
25
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (TPS), the important cytomorphological features for diagnosing high-grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC) are a nuclear-to-cytoplasmic (N:C) ratio exceeding 0.7, hyperchromasia, coarse chromatin, and irregular nuclear borders. However, quantitative cytomorphological assessments of HGUC cells using SurePath slides are rare. Therefore, we evaluated HGUC cells on SurePath slides quantitatively using a digital image analysis system and compared these data with ThinPrep data. The same urine samples were divided into two aliquots and used to prepare SurePath and ThinPrep slides. We used ImageJ to measure the N:C ratio, hyperchromasia, and irregular nuclear borders for HGUC cells on SurePath and ThinPrep slides. The total number of analysed HGUC cells on SurePath slides was 981, versus 889 on ThinPrep slides. Hyperchromasia and irregular nuclear borders were significantly more severe on SurePath than on ThinPrep slides. Conversely, the N:C ratio did not differ between the methods. Additionally, HGUC cells with N:C ratios exceeding 0.7 were present on almost all slides for both methods. Our data indicated the reasonableness of using the N:C ratio as the major criterion for TPS on both SurePath and ThinPrep slides, and an N:C ratio cut-off of 0.7 as suitable for identifying HGUC cells. However, the severity of hyperchromasia and irregular nuclear borders differed between the processing methods.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
654-659Subventions
Organisme : The Japanese Society of Clinical Cytology
Informations de copyright
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Charlton ME, Adamo MP, Sun L, Deorah S. Bladder cancer collaborative stage variables and their data quality, usage, and clinical implications: a review of SEER data, 2004-2010. Cancer. 2014;120:3815-3825.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(1):7-34.
Thiryayi SA, Rana DN. Urine cytopathology: challenges, pitfalls, and mimics. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012;40(11):1019-1034.
Straccia P, Bizzarro T, Fadda G, Pierconti F. Comparison between cytospin and liquid-based cytology in urine specimens classified according to the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(7):519-523.
Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DFI. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. New York: Springer Science+Business Media; 2015.
Barkan GA, Wojcik EM, Nayar R, et al. The Paris system for reporting urinary cytology: the quest to develop a standardized terminology. Acta Cytol. 2016;60(3):185-197.
VandenBussche CJ. A review of the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology. Cytopathology. 2016;27(3):153-156.
Richardson CJ, Pambuccian SE, Barkan GA. Split-sample comparison of urothelial cells in ThinPrep and cytospin preparations in urinary cytology: do we need to adjust The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology criteria? Cancer Cytopathol. 2020;128(2):119-125.
Michael CW, McConnel J, Pecott J, Afify AM, Al-Khafaji B. Comparison of ThinPrep and TriPath PREP liquid-based preparations in nongynecologic specimens: a pilot study. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;25(3):177-184.
Park GS, Lee SH, Jung SL, Jung CK. Liquid-based cytology in the fine needle aspiration of parathyroid lesions: a comparison study with the conventional smear, ThinPrep, and SurePath. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(10):12160-12168.
Toyonaga Y, Yamazaki K, Koyama Y, Yamada M, Ishida Y. A modified direct-smear processing technique employing two-step centrifugation/fixation is useful for detecting high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Acta Cytol. 2017;61(6):447-454.
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;125(9):710-716.
Ohsaki H, Sofue T, Kawakami K, et al. WT1 immunoenzyme staining using SurePath(™) processed urine cytology helps to detect kidney disease. Cytopathology. 2016;27(1):43-49.
Hologic, Inc. ThinPrep® 5000 Processor: Operator’s Manual. Available from URL: https://www.hologic.com/sites/default/files/package-insert/MAN-02203-001_002_02.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2021.
Zhang ML, Guo AX, VandenBussche CJ. Morphologists overestimate the nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(9):669-677.
Layfield LJ, Esebua M, Frazier SR, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of nuclear/cytoplasmic ratio assessments in urinary cytology specimens. Diagn Cytopathol. 2017;45(2):107-112.