Nuclear long diameter as a new criterion to distinguish high-grade urothelial carcinoma cells from benign reactive cells.
The Paris System
high‐grade urothelial carcinoma
liquid‐based cytology
nuclear long diameter
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:
28 May 2024
28 May 2024
Historique:
revised:
08
05
2024
received:
23
03
2024
accepted:
13
05
2024
medline:
29
5
2024
pubmed:
29
5
2024
entrez:
29
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Recently, the nuclear area has attracted attention as a morphological parameter to differentiate high-grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC) cells from benign reactive cells. The nuclear long diameter (NLD) strongly correlates with the nuclear area and is easy to subjectively estimate. Therefore, this study examined the usefulness of the NLD-to-neutrophil diameter ratio for detecting HGUC cells in urine cytology. This study included 29, 26 and 18 patients with HGUC, glomerular disease and urolithiasis respectively. An image analysis system was used to measure the NLD of HGUC and benign reactive cells (reactive renal tubular cells and reactive urothelial cells) and the neutrophil diameter that appeared in the voided urine in these cases. The NLD index was calculated using the NLD-to-neutrophil diameter ratio. We subsequently compared HGUC and benign reactive cells with respect to NLD and NLD indices. In addition, the HGUC cell group and benign reactive cell group were compared by selecting the five cells with the largest NLD and NLD index on each slide. The NLD and NLD indices of HGUC cells were significantly higher than those of benign reactive cells in all cells and in the five cells with the largest NLD and NLD indices. The cut-off value of the NLD index for detecting HGUC cells was 1.25 in all cells and 1.80 in the five cells with the largest NLD index. The NLD index is a useful parameter that can be introduced into routine microscopic examinations to differentiate HGUC cells from benign reactive cells.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
ID : 22K07396
Informations de copyright
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Cibas ES, Ducatman BS. Cytology: Diagnostic Principles and Clinical Correlates. 4th ed. Elsevier; 2014.
Murphy WM. Current status of urinary cytology in the evaluation of bladder neoplasms. Hum Pathol. 1990;21(9):886‐896.
Planz B, Jochims E, Deix T, Caspers HP, Jakse G, Boecking A. The role of urinary cytology for detection of bladder cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31(3):304‐308.
Thiryayi SA, Rana DN. Urine cytopathology: challenges, pitfalls, and mimics. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012;40(11):1019‐1034.
Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz D. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Springer; 2016.
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;126(6):381‐389.
Zare S, Mirsadraei L, Reisian N, et al. A single institutional experience with The Paris System for reporting urinary cytology: correlation of cytology and histology in 194 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 2018;150(2):162‐167.
Roy M, Kaushal S, Jain D, Seth A, Iyer VK, Mathur SR. An institutional experience with The Paris System: a paradigm shift from ambiguous terminology to more objective criteria for reporting urine cytology. Cytopathology. 2017;28(6):509‐515.
Bertsch EC, Siddiqui MT, Ellis CL. The Paris System for reporting urinary cytology improves correlation with surgical pathology biopsy diagnoses of the lower urinary tract. Diagn Cytopathol. 2018;46(3):221‐227.
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):62‐66.
Poropatich K, Yang JC, Goyal R, Parini V, Yang XJ. Nuclear size measurement for distinguishing urothelial carcinomas from reactive urothelium on tissue sections. Diagn Pathol. 2016;11(1):57.
Milord RA, Lecksell K, Epstein JI. An objective morphologic parameter to aid in the diagnosis of flat urothelial carcinoma in situ. Hum Pathol. 2001;32(9):997‐1002.
Vosoughi A, Ordobazari A, Lora Gonzalez MA, et al. The Paris System “atypical urothelial cells” category: can the current criteria be improved? J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021;10(1):3‐8.
Tanaka S, Naritomi M, Monobe Y, Ariyasu S. The inclusion of nuclear area improves The Paris System for reporting urinary cytology. Cytopathology. 2023;34(2):106‐112.
Sakumo K, Morihashi K, Nakamura A, et al. The usefulness of nuclear area in the diagnosis of high‐grade urothelial carcinoma cells in voided urine cytology. Cytopathology. 2023;34(4):295‐301.
Enomoto K, Matsunaga T, Sofue T, et al. p53 expression in repair/reactive renal tubular cells: a potential pitfall leading to a false‐positive diagnosis of urine cytology. Cancer Med. 2021;10(24):8846‐8853.
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.
Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz D. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. 2nd ed. Springer; 2022.
Ohsaki H, Hirakawa E, Kushida Y, et al. Can cytological features differentiate reactive renal tubular cells from low‐grade urothelial carcinoma cells? Cytopathology. 2010;21(5):326‐333.
Okuda C, Kyotake A, Nakamura A, Itoh T, Kamoshida S, Ohsaki H. Quantitative cytomorphological comparison of SurePath and ThinPrep liquid‐based cytology using high‐grade urothelial carcinoma cells. Cytopathology. 2021;32(5):654‐659.
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.