{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Recent Advances in the Classification of Bladder Cancer - Updates from the 5th Edition of the World Health Organization Classification of the Urinary and Male Genital Tumors.
{Author}: Guo CC;Shen SS;Czerniak B;
{Journal}: Bladder Cancer
{Volume}: 9
{Issue}: 1
{Year}: 2023
{Factor}: 1.449
{DOI}: 10.3233/BLC-220106
{Abstract}: BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Classification (WHO) of Urinary and Male Genital Tumors has recently been updated to its 5th edition. The new edition presents a comprehensive approach to the classification of urinary and male genital tumors with an incorporation of morphologic, clinical, and genomic data.
OBJECTIVE: This review aims to update the new classification of bladder cancer in the 5th edition and to highlight important changes in nomenclatures, diagnostic criteria, and molecular characterization, as compared to the 4th edition.
METHODS: The pathologic classification of bladder cancer in the 5th edition of WHO Classification of Urinary and Male Genital Tumours was compared to that in the 4th edition. PubMed was searched using key words, including bladder cancer, WHO 1973, WHO 1998, WHO 2004, WHO 2016, histology, pathology, genomics, and molecular classification in the time frame from 1973 to August of 2022. Other relevant papers were also consulted, resulting in the selection of 81 papers as references.
RESULTS: The binary grading of papillary urothelial carcinoma (UC) is practical, but it may be oversimplified and contribute to "grade migration" in recent years. An arbitrary cutoff (5%) has been proposed for bladder cancers with mixed grades. The diagnosis of papillary urothelial neoplasm with low malignant potential has been dramatically reduced in recent years because of overlapping morphology and treatment with low-grade papillary UC. An inverted growth pattern should be distinguished from true (or destructive) stromal invasion in papillary UC. Several methods have been proposed for pT1 tumor substaging, but it is often challenging to substage pT1 tumors in small biopsy specimens. Bladder UC shows a high tendency for divergent differentiation, leading to several distinct histologic subtypes associated with an aggressive clinical behavior. Molecular classification based on the genomic analysis may be a useful tool in the stratification of patients for optimal treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The 5th edition of WHO Classification of Urinary and Male Genital Tumours has made several significant changes in the classification of bladder cancer. It is important to be aware of these changes and to incorporate them into routine clinical practice.