Classification and controversies in pathology of ependymomas
Classification and controversies in pathology of ependymomas
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00381-008-0804-4
复制
发表时间：
2009-10-01
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Godfraind, Catherine
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Godfraind, Catherine
Bailey和Cushing在1926年第一次脑肿瘤分类中将室管膜瘤确定为脑肿瘤实体。只要排除其他具有室管膜瘤样特征的肿瘤，室管膜瘤的诊断就不会有争议。相反，评分是争论的来源。描述室管膜瘤的组织学特征，建立诊断和分级可能有助于更好地理解这一争议。通过PubMed检索相关文献，检索关键词：室管膜瘤、+/-预后、+/-生物标志物、+/-分级、+/-免疫组织化学、+/-增殖指数。分级争议源于难以捉摸的WHO特征和室管膜瘤的个体特征，包括肿瘤位置、肿瘤模式/变异和生物标志物的可变表达。需要一种分级方案，该方案具有分离分级的一般能力，并能预测个体的临床演变。只有这样，室管膜肿瘤的分层和靶向治疗才有可能。
Bailey and Cushing established ependymoma as a brain tumour entity in the first brain tumour classification (1926). Diagnosis of ependymomas is not subject to controversy as long as other tumours presenting ependymoma-like features have been ruled out. Grading conversely is a source of debate. Description of histological features establishing diagnosis and grading of ependymomas may help to better understand this controversy.Literature has been reviewed using PubMed with the following key words: ependymoma, +/- prognosis, +/- biomaker, +/- grading, +/- immunohistochemistry, +/- proliferative index.Grading controversy arises from elusive WHO features and individual characteristics of ependymomas including tumour location, tumour pattern/variant and variable expression of biomarkers.There is a need for a grading scheme with a proven general ability to dissociate grades, and to predict individual clinical evolution. Only then will stratified and targeted therapeutics for ependymal tumours be possible.