| Literature DB >> 27357719 |
Kate Poropatich1, Jason C Yang2, Rajen Goyal1, Vamsi Parini3, Ximing J Yang4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pathological diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma (UC) is primarily based on cytological atypia. It has previously been shown that high-grade (HG) UC, particularly UC in situ cells (CIS), can be over five times the size of a lymphocyte. However, this has not been demonstrated in comparison to reactive urothelium. The objective of this study was to empirically compare the difference in nuclear size of UC cells with reactive urothelial cells.Entities:
Keywords: High-grade urothelial carcinoma (HG UC); Low-grade urothelial carcinoma (LG UC); Nucleomegaly; Reactive urothelial atypia; Urothelial carcinoma in situ (CIS)
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27357719 PMCID: PMC4928350 DOI: 10.1186/s13000-016-0501-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
Fig. 1Reactive and Neoplastic Urothelium Categories Photomicrographs Taken With CellSens at 40x. a Reactive urothelium b LG UC c LG UC d CIS
Fig. 2Measuring Nuclei of HGUC and CIS. a Example of high-power (40x) photomicrograph of HG UC taken for nuclear size measurements. b Representative schematic of CellSens software to measure nuclear l and w, in a case of urothelial CIS
Comparison of Mean Sizes for Nuclei From Reactive Urothelium, LGUC, HGUC and CIS
| Cell type | # patients | # nuclei | L um | SD | 95 % CI | W um | SD | 95 % CI | Area um2 | SD | 95 % CI | Linear Ratio (Lnucleus)/, (Wnucleus)/Llymphocyte a | Area ratio (Anucleus/Alymphocyte)b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reactive Urothelium | 10 | 168 | 8.91 | 1.95 | [8.62, 9.2] | 5.75 | 1.29 | [5.55, 5.95] | 42.03 | 16.50 | [39.5, 44.5] | 1.85, 1.2 | 2.32 |
| LG UCa | 20 | 271 | 10.85 | 1.82 | [10.63, 11.07] | 6.92 | 1.20 | [6.78, 7.06] | 60.46 | 17.68 | [58.36, 62.56] | 2.26, 1.44 | 3.33 |
| HG UCa | 20 | 384 | 13.56 | 3.52 | [13.21, 13.91] | 8.82 | 2.54 | [8.57, 9.07] | 100.24 | 68.15 | [93.42, 107.06] | 2.82, 1.83 | 5.53 |
| CIS | 10 | 262 | 15.17 | 3.03 | [14.8, 15.54] | 9.35 | 2.22 | [9.08, 9.62] | 115.5 | 45.3 | [110.01, 120.99] | 3.15, 1.94 | 6.37 |
LG UC low-grade urothelial carcinoma, HG UC high-grade urothelial carcinoma, CIS carcinoma in situ, SD standard deviation, CI confidence interval, l length, w width, a area
aMean l and w (um) of lymphocyte = 4.81
bMean a (um2) of lymphocyte = 18.12
Fig. 3Comparison of Nuclear Length and Width Among Different Groups of Urothelium. Comparison of nuclear l and w of reactive urothelium (diamond), LG UC (square), HG UC (triangle) and CIS (circle). Trend line shows w and l increase linearly according to nuclear grade of dysplasia
Fig. 4Comparison of Areas Among Reactive and Neoplastic Nuclei. Comparison of nuclear a for reactive urothelial, LG UC, HG UC and CIS
Fig. 5Comparison of Nuclear Cell Length and Width for Reactive Urothelium and CIS. A cut-off nuclear l of 11 um and nuclear w of 7 um (solid lines) differentiates CIS nuclei (circles) from reactive urothelial nuclei (diamonds)