scholarly journals Molecular Classification of Soft Tissue and Bone Tumors

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 2326
Author(s):  
David Creytens
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Bone Tumors ◽  
Who Classification ◽  
Molecular Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
The World ◽  
Classification Of Tumors ◽  
Health Organization

Soft tissue and bone tumors constitute a large and heterogeneous group of tumors comprising >100 distinct histological types and subtypes, which are diagnosed and classified using criteria from the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumors [...]

scholarly journals Classification of Tumors of the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues. Discovering Diseases—Defining Their Features

Hemato ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-9
Author(s):  
Antonino Carbone
Keyword(s):  
World Health Organization ◽  
Who Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Lymphoid Tissues ◽  
The World ◽  
Classification Of Tumors ◽  
Health Organization

The World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumours of the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues [...]

Expert Second Opinion Pathology Review of Lymphoma in the Era of the World Health Organization Classification.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 3317-3317
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Matasar ◽  
Weiji Shi ◽  
Jonathan Silberstien ◽  
Julie T. Feldstein ◽  
Daniel Filippa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
World Health Organization ◽  
Who Classification ◽  
Second Opinion ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Major Revision ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Pathology Review

Abstract Background: The effective management of lymphoma depends upon an accurate and precise pathologic diagnosis. However, the classification of lymphoma continues to evolve. Reports addressing the role of second opinion expert pathology review have found varying impact, and little is known regarding the predictors of a change in diagnosis. Furthermore, the impact of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of lymphomas over the 5 years following their formal publication has not been formally assessed. Methods: All outside pathology is reviewed at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) before a clinical opinion is finalized. We performed a chart review of all externally referred lymphoma cases from 1/1/01 to 6/30/01 and from 1/1/06 to 6/30/06 with second opinions from MSKCC hematopathology. Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for univariate analysis and logistic regression for multivariate analysis. Results: 719 patients (365 in 2001, 354 in 2006) met inclusion criteria. Diagnostic revisions were classified as major or minor; major changes were those that would lead to management changes as per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. 122 patients (18% in 2001, 16% in 2006) had a major diagnostic revision and an additional 22 (4% in 2001, 2% in 2006) had confirmation of major revisions rendered previously at second opinion from another National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC). This did not change significantly by era, with 79 major revisions (22%) in 2001 and 65 (18%) in 2006 (P=NS). An additional 55 patients [24 (7%) in 2001, 31 (9%) in 2006] received minor revisions. Common categories of major revision included changing from nondiagnostic/ambiguous to definitive [6 in 2001, 8 in 2006], definitive to nondiagnostic [9 in 2001, 9 in 2006], malignant to benign [1 in 2001, 6 in 2006], indolent B-cell lymphoma (BCL) to aggressive BCL [15 in 2001, 8 in 2006], and aggressive BCL to indolent BCL [4 in 2001, 1 in 2006]. Major diagnostic revision was significantly associated with additional immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing in 2001 (OR=2.3; 95%CI 1.3, 4). In 2006, additional IHC (OR=1.8; 95%CI 1, 3.4), repeat biopsy (OR=3.1; 95%CI 1.2, 8.0), and skin biopsy (versus lymph node biopsy; OR 3.3; 95%CI 1.6, 7.0) were significantly associated with major revision. Two of the 7 patients reclassified as benign received revisions based on additional IHC, whereas 7 of the 14 patients reclassified as malignant were revised due to either additional IHC (4) or repeat biopsy (3). No effect was seen by biopsy type, nor were patient gender, age, race or ethnicity associated with odds of major revision. Of cases seen first at another CCC, 12% in 2001 and 16% in 2006 received major revisions, compared to 19% (2001) and 16% (2006) of other cases; these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: The rate of clinically meaningful diagnostic revisions at second opinion expert pathology review was high for patients seen at MSKCC, and remained so despite five years of increased familiarity with the WHO classification schema. These data confirm the fact that an appropriate evaluation, including detailed IHC and an adequate biopsy specimen, plays a central role in the accurate diagnosis of lymphoma. The high rates of diagnostic revision reported here lend support to the routine application of expert second opinion hematopathology review.

The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of the myeloid neoplasms

Blood ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 100 (7) ◽  
pp. 2292-2302 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Vardiman ◽  
Nancy Lee Harris ◽  
Richard D. Brunning
Keyword(s):  
World Health Organization ◽  
Who Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Classification Schemes ◽  
Myeloid Neoplasms ◽  
Lymphoid Neoplasms ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Collaborative Efforts

A World Health Organization (WHO) classification of hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms has recently been published. This classification was developed through the collaborative efforts of the Society for Hematopathology, the European Association of Hematopathologists, and more than 100 clinical hematologists and scientists who are internationally recognized for their expertise in hematopoietic neoplasms. For the lymphoid neoplasms, this classification provides a refinement of the entities described in the Revised European-American Lymphoma (REAL) Classification—a system that is now used worldwide. To date, however, there has been no published explanation or rationale given for the WHO classification of the myeloid neoplasms. The purpose of this communication is to outline briefly the WHO classification of malignant myeloid diseases, to draw attention to major differences between it and antecedent classification schemes, and to provide the rationale for those differences.

The 2008 revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia: rationale and important changes

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (5) ◽  
pp. 937-951 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Vardiman ◽  
Jüergen Thiele ◽  
Daniel A. Arber ◽  
Richard D. Brunning ◽  
Michael J. Borowitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Leukemia ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Who Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Lymphoid Tissues ◽  
Myeloid Neoplasms ◽  
The World ◽  
Genetic Features ◽  
Health Organization

Recently the World Health Organization (WHO), in collaboration with the European Association for Haematopathology and the Society for Hematopathology, published a revised and updated edition of the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues. The 4th edition of the WHO classification incorporates new information that has emerged from scientific and clinical studies in the interval since the publication of the 3rd edition in 2001, and includes new criteria for the recognition of some previously described neoplasms as well as clarification and refinement of the defining criteria for others. It also adds entities—some defined principally by genetic features—that have only recently been characterized. In this paper, the classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia is highlighted with the aim of familiarizing hematologists, clinical scientists, and hematopathologists not only with the major changes in the classification but also with the rationale for those changes.

scholarly journals The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 127 (20) ◽  
pp. 2391-2405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel A. Arber ◽  
Attilio Orazi ◽  
Robert Hasserjian ◽  
Jürgen Thiele ◽  
Michael J. Borowitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Leukemia ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Who Classification ◽  
World Health ◽  
Lymphoid Tissues ◽  
Acute Leukemias ◽  
Myeloid Neoplasms ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization

Abstract The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues was last updated in 2008. Since then, there have been numerous advances in the identification of unique biomarkers associated with some myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemias, largely derived from gene expression analysis and next-generation sequencing that can significantly improve the diagnostic criteria as well as the prognostic relevance of entities currently included in the WHO classification and that also suggest new entities that should be added. Therefore, there is a clear need for a revision to the current classification. The revisions to the categories of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia will be published in a monograph in 2016 and reflect a consensus of opinion of hematopathologists, hematologists, oncologists, and geneticists. The 2016 edition represents a revision of the prior classification rather than an entirely new classification and attempts to incorporate new clinical, prognostic, morphologic, immunophenotypic, and genetic data that have emerged since the last edition. The major changes in the classification and their rationale are presented here.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document