International Society Of Neuropathology--Haarlem consensus guidelines for nervous system tumor classification and grading.
International Society Of Neuropathology--Haarlem consensus guidelines for nervous system tumor classification and grading.
复制标题
国际神经病理学协会 - 哈勒姆神经系统肿瘤分类和分级共识指南。
DOI：
10.1111/bpa.12171
复制
发表时间：
2014-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
International Society Of Neuropathology--Haarlem
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Louis DN;Perry A;Burger P;Ellison DW;Reifenberger G;von Deimling A;Aldape K;Brat D;Collins VP;Eberhart C;Figarella-Branger D;Fuller GN;Giangaspero F;Giannini C;Hawkins C;Kleihues P;Korshunov A;Kros JM;Beatriz Lopes M;Ng HK;Ohgaki H;Paulus W;Pietsch T;Rosenblum M;Rushing E;Soylemezoglu F;Wiestler O;Wesseling P;International Society Of Neuropathology--Haarlem
神经系统肿瘤生物学的重大发现提出了一个问题：如何将分子信息等非组织学数据纳入世界卫生组织 (WHO) 的下一个中枢神经系统肿瘤分类中。为了解决这个问题，在国际神经病理学学会（ISN）的赞助下，在荷兰哈勒姆召开了具有分子诊断专业知识的神经病理学家会议。在会议之前，与会者征求了不同神经肿瘤学专业临床同事的意见。目前的“白皮书”对会议的建议进行了分类，会上达成了共识，即将分子信息纳入下一个 WHO 分类应遵循一套提供的“ISN-Haarlem”指南。显着的建议包括（i）诊断实体的定义应尽可能狭窄，以优化观察者间的再现性、临床病理学预测和治疗计划； (ii) 诊断应与“综合诊断”下面列出的组织学分类、WHO 分级和分子信息“分层”； (iii) 应针对每个肿瘤实体确定其定义是否需要、建议或不需要分子信息； (iv) 一些儿科实体应与其成人对应实体分开； (v) 应向神经肿瘤学互补学科的专家征求有关肿瘤分类指导决策的意见； (iv) 诊断报告应遵循实体特定的分子检测和报告格式。希望这些指南将有助于即将更新的WHO中枢神经系统肿瘤分类第四版。
Major discoveries in the biology of nervous system tumors have raised the question of how non‐histological data such as molecular information can be incorporated into the next World Health Organization (WHO) classification of central nervous system tumors. To address this question, a meeting of neuropathologists with expertise in molecular diagnosis was held in Haarlem, the Netherlands, under the sponsorship of the International Society of Neuropathology (ISN). Prior to the meeting, participants solicited input from clinical colleagues in diverse neuro‐oncological specialties. The present “white paper” catalogs the recommendations of the meeting, at which a consensus was reached that incorporation of molecular information into the next WHO classification should follow a set of provided “ISN‐Haarlem” guidelines. Salient recommendations include that (i) diagnostic entities should be defined as narrowly as possible to optimize interobserver reproducibility, clinicopathological predictions and therapeutic planning; (ii) diagnoses should be “layered” with histologic classification, WHO grade and molecular information listed below an “integrated diagnosis”; (iii) determinations should be made for each tumor entity as to whether molecular information is required, suggested or not needed for its definition; (iv) some pediatric entities should be separated from their adult counterparts; (v) input for guiding decisions regarding tumor classification should be solicited from experts in complementary disciplines of neuro‐oncology; and (iv) entity‐specific molecular testing and reporting formats should be followed in diagnostic reports. It is hoped that these guidelines will facilitate the forthcoming update of the fourth edition of the WHO classification of central nervous system tumors.