[Cooperation between clinicians and pathologists].

To the disadvantage of physician in training and quality control the number of post mortem examinations has declined in many Western countries including Germany. The frequency at which surgical or biopsy specimens are investigated by pathologist, on the other hand, appears to increase and clinicians have become increasingly more reliant on a pathologists assessment in terms of diagnosis and treatment strategy. There are some areas where communication between clinician and pathologist could be improved. The first regards the classification of malignancies which should, wherever possible, follow international guidelines such the WHO's. From a clinicians perspective assessment of tumour staging and grading should be based on the patient's prognosis rather than morphological criteria alone. In the case of rare tumours, for which the clinician can be assumed to be ignorant, reference to the literature is helpful. If the surgical or biopsy specimen reveals a malignancy that cannot be classified suggestions for a differential diagnosis can be still helpful. Frequently, at least in my field of speciality, the only tissue accessible is a hepatic or lymphatic metastasis. Determination of the tumour of origin is often essential in deciding on treatment options and every effort including immonocytochemical methods should be made to help to determine the tumour's original site. It spares enormous cost and makes many unpleasant interventional procedures redundant. Further areas where clinicians increasingly need help from pathologists are the diagnosis of inflammatory and infectious diseases and in the usage of molecular genetic methods.