Papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential: reliability of diagnosis and outcome

OBJECTIVE To determine the ability of pathologists to reproducibly diagnose a newly defined lesion, i.e. the papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (PUNLMP) using the published criteria, defined by the 1998 World Health Organisation/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) classification system; in addition, debate remains about the clinical behaviour of these lesions, thus the rates of recurrence and progression of PUNLMP lesions were assessed and compared with low-grade papillary urothelial carcinomas (LG-PUC) and high-grade (HG-PUC) over a 10-year follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-nine cases of superficial bladder cancer (G1-3 pTa) representing an initial diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma made in 1990 were identified and re-graded using the 1998 WHO/ISUP classification by two pathologists. Inter-observer agreement was assessed using Cohen weighted kappa statistics. After reclassification the clinical follow-up was reviewed retrospectively, and episodes of recurrence and progression recorded. RESULTS The inter-observer agreement was moderate, regardless of whether one (kappa 0.45) or two (kappa 0.60) pathologists were used to grade these lesions. Re-classification identified 12 PUNLMP, 28 LG-PUC and nine HG-PUC. PUNLMP lesions recurred in 25% (3/12) of cases; no progression was documented. Recurrence rates were 75% (21/28) and 67% (6/9) for LG- and HG-PUC, respectively, and progression rates were 4% (1/28) and 22% (2/9). CONCLUSION The 1998 WHO/ISUP classification of urothelial neoplasms can be reproducibly applied by pathologists, with a moderate level of agreement. There is evidence that PUNLMP lesions have a more indolent clinical behaviour than urothelial carcinomas. However, the risk of recurrence and progression remains, and clinical monitoring of these patients is important.

Audit of postoperative chemoradiotherapy as adjuvant therapy for resected gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: An Australian multicentre experience

Background: Improved disease free and overall survivals were seen in curatively resected patients with gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma treated with the Intergroup 0116 (INT 0116) protocol of postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared to surgery alone. This protocol has not been widely adopted in Australian centres because of perceived risks of toxicity. Methods: We reviewed the case records from 45 consecutive patients treated between May 1998 and August 2003 with the INT 0116 protocol and variations at five Australian institutions. The median age was 61.5 years (range 38-79). Twenty-nine patients had gastric and 12 had gastroesophageal junction primaries. All patients had attempted curative resection, however, seven had involved microscopic margins (R1 resection). Thirty-five had regional node involvement and none had evidence of distant metastasis. Results: The overall National Cancer Institute - Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) version 2.0 grade 3 and grade 4 toxicity rates for all patients were 37.8% and 4.4%, respectively. There were no treatment related deaths. Gastrointestinal grade 3 toxicity was observed in 20% of patients, while haematologic grade 3 and 4 toxicity was observed in 17.8%. Toxicities experienced led to chemotherapy dose reductions in 22 patients and dose delay in 11 patients. Seven patients had a delay in radiotherapy and two did not proceed with radiotherapy. At a median follow up of 16 months (range 5-35) from surgery, 28 patients have relapsed (six with local recurrence alone) with 22 deaths occurring, all but one caused by cancer. Conclusion: The INT 0116 protocol is a safe and feasible schedule in a multicentre setting with an acceptable rate of toxicity and is an appropriate adjuvant treatment option for high-risk resected gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Assessing the effectiveness of a mammography screening service

Background: Trials have shown that mammography screening reduces mortality and probably decreases morbidity related to breast cancer. Methods: We assessed whether the major mammography service in Western Australia (BreastScreen WA) is likely to reduce mortality by comparing prognostic variables between screen-detected and other cases of breast cancer diagnosed in 1999. We assessed likely reductions in morbidity by comparing treatments received by these two groups. To confirm mortality and morbidity reduction, we also compared prognostic variables and treatments with targets. Information on demographic variables, tumour characteristics at presentation and treatments were collected from medical records for all incident cases of breast cancer in Western Australia in 1999. We matched cases with the Western Australian Cancer Registry records to determine which cases had been detected by BreastScreen WA. Results: BreastScreen WA achieved the targets for mortality reduction. Tumours detected by BreastScreen WA were smaller in size, less likely to have vascular invasion, of lower histological grade and were more likely to be ductal carcinoma in situ alone without invasive carcinoma. Oestrogen receptor status was more likely to be positive, the difference in progesterone status was not significant, and lymph node involvement tended to be lower. BreastScreen WA patients were treated more often with local therapy and less often with systemic therapy, and the proportion of patients treated with breast-conserving surgery was close to the target for minimizing morbidity in breast cancer. Conclusion: Mammographic detection of breast cancer by BreastScreen WA is associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and a more favourable prognosis.