Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.typeArtigo de periódicopt_BR
dc.titleTumor Grade Heterogeneity In Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma--proposal Of A System Using Combined Numbers.pt_BR
dc.contributor.authorBillis, Apt_BR
dc.contributor.authorCarvalho, R Bpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorMattos, A Cpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorNegretti, Fpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorNogueira, C Rpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, M Cpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorValença, J Tpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorAdam, R Lpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorCotta, A Cpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorNunes, M Spt_BR
dc.contributor.authorDinamarco, P Vpt_BR
unicamp.authorA Billis, Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, State University of Campinas, Brazil. athanase@fcm.unicamp.brpt_BR B Carvalho,pt C Mattos,pt Negretti,pt R Nogueira,pt C Oliveira,pt T Valença,pt L Adam,pt C Cotta,pt S Nunes,pt V Dinamarco,pt
dc.subjectCarcinoma, Transitional Cellpt_BR
dc.subjectNeoplasm Stagingpt_BR
dc.subjectUrinary Bladder Neoplasmspt_BR
dc.description.abstractThere is no consensus for grading when more than one grade is present in bladder carcinoma. We propose a grading system that considers the primary (most common) and secondary (second most common) grade of bladder cancer. Grade was correlated with stage of the tumors. We studied 293 bladder transurethral resections or radical cystectomies. Grade was considered as 1, 2 or 3 according to the 1999 World Health Organization system. The number was repeated when only one grade was seen. A final score was obtained which ranged from 2 to 6. All cases were also graded according to the highest grade area even if it was focal. According to the highest grade area, the distribution was 80 (74.07%), 27 (25.00%) and 1 (0.92%) for grade 1; 31 (24.03%), 69 (53.48%) and 29 (22.48%) for grade 2; and 0 (0%), 17 (30.35%) and 39 (69.64%) for grade 3, corresponding to the stages Ta, T1 and T2-T3, respectively. Using the system of combined numbers, grade 2 was stratified into subgroups 1 + 2 and 2 + 2 which are statistically different (p < 0.05) when considering stage. In grade 3, there was also a trend for statistical difference (p = 0.066) between grades 2 + 3 and 3 + 3. The grading system of combined numbers, stratifies grade 2 into subgroups 1 + 2 and 2 + 2, and grade 3 into subgroups 2 + 3 and 3 + 3 which are statistically different when considering stage. This grading system of combined numbers takes into consideration tumor heterogeneity and may be of value in prospective studies for analysis of prognosis and therapeutic response.en
dc.relation.ispartofScandinavian Journal Of Urology And Nephrologypt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofabbreviationScand. J. Urol. Nephrol.pt_BR
dc.identifier.citationScandinavian Journal Of Urology And Nephrology. v. 35, n. 4, p. 275-9, 2001-Sep.pt_BR
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2015-11-27T12:29:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2001en
Appears in Collections:Unicamp - Artigos e Outros Documentos

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.