Suppr超能文献

新辅助治疗后胃肠癌肿瘤退缩分级的实践差异:国际调查结果。

Varying practices in tumor regression grading of gastrointestinal carcinomas after neoadjuvant therapy: results of an international survey.

机构信息

Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Institute of Pathology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

出版信息

Mod Pathol. 2020 Apr;33(4):676-689. doi: 10.1038/s41379-019-0393-7. Epub 2019 Oct 31.

Abstract

Tumor regression grading is routinely performed on neoadjuvantly treated gastrointestinal cancer resections. Challenges in tumor regression grading include grossing standards, multiple grading systems, and difficulty interpreting therapy-induced changes. We surveyed gastrointestinal pathologists around the world for their practices in handling neoadjuvantly treated gastrointestinal cancer specimens and reporting tumor regression using a 23-question online survey. Topics addressed grossing, histologic work-up, tumor regression grading systems, and degree of difficulty identifying and estimating residual cancer within treatment effect. Two-hundred three responses were received, including 173 participants who completed the entire questionnaire. Fifty percent of the participants were from Europe, 29% from North America, 10% from Australia, and 11% from other continents. Ninety-five percent routinely report a tumor regression grade and 92% have standardized grossing and histologic work-up: 27% always completely embed the entire tumor bed, 54% embed the complete tumor site if not a grossly apparent, large mass. Fifty-nine percent use hematoxylin & eosin alone for assessment; the remaining use additional stains. In North America and Australia, the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)/College of American Pathologists (CAP)/Ryan system is routinely used for gastroesophageal (71%) and rectal carcinomas (77%). In Europe, the Mandard system is common (36%) for gastroesophageal tumors, followed by AJCC/CAP/Ryan (22%), and Becker (10%); for rectal CA, the Dworak system (30%) is followed by AJCC/CAP/Ryan (24%) and Mandard (14%). This regional differences were significant (p < 0.001 each). Fifty-one percent prefer a four-tiered system. Sixty-six percent think that regressive changes in lymph nodes should be part of a regression grade. Sixty-nine percent consider identifying residual tumor straight-forward, but estimating therapy-induced fibrosis difficult (57%). Free comments raised issues of costs for work-up and clinical relevance. In conclusion, this multinational survey provides a comprehensive overview of grossing and histologic work-up with regards to tumor regression grading in gastrointestinal cancers with partly significant regional differences particularly between North America and Europe.

摘要

肿瘤退缩分级通常在新辅助治疗的胃肠癌切除标本中进行。肿瘤退缩分级的挑战包括大体标本标准、多种分级系统以及解读治疗诱导的变化的困难。我们对全球胃肠病理学家进行了一项关于处理新辅助治疗的胃肠癌标本和使用 23 个问题的在线调查报告肿瘤退缩分级的实践的调查。讨论的主题包括大体标本处理、组织学检查、肿瘤退缩分级系统以及识别和估计治疗效果内残留癌症的难度。共收到 203 份回复,其中 173 名参与者完成了整个问卷。50%的参与者来自欧洲,29%来自北美,10%来自澳大利亚,11%来自其他大陆。95%的人常规报告肿瘤退缩分级,92%的人有标准化的大体标本和组织学检查:27%的人总是完全嵌入整个肿瘤床,54%的人如果不是明显的大肿块,则完全嵌入完整的肿瘤部位。59%的人仅使用苏木精和伊红进行评估;其余的人使用额外的染色。在北美和澳大利亚,美国癌症联合委员会/美国病理学家学院/瑞安系统常规用于胃食管(71%)和直肠癌(77%)。在欧洲,曼达德系统常用于胃食管肿瘤(36%),其次是 AJCC/CAP/Ryan(22%)和贝克尔(10%);对于直肠 CA,Dworak 系统(30%)紧随其后是 AJCC/CAP/Ryan(24%)和 Mandard(14%)。这种区域差异具有统计学意义(p < 0.001)。51%的人更喜欢四层次系统。66%的人认为淋巴结的退行性变化应该是退缩分级的一部分。69%的人认为识别残留肿瘤是直接的,但估计治疗诱导的纤维化是困难的(57%)。自由评论提出了工作评估和临床相关性的成本问题。总之,这项多国家调查提供了关于胃肠癌肿瘤退缩分级的大体标本和组织学检查的全面概述,具有部分显著的区域差异,特别是在北美和欧洲之间。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验