COLLEGE-OF-AMERICAN-PATHOLOGISTS CONFERENCE XXVI ON CLINICAL RELEVANCE OF PROGNOSTIC MARKERS IN SOLID TUMORS - REPORT OF THE COLORECTAL-CANCER WORKING GROUP

Citation
Lp. Fielding et N. Pettigrew, COLLEGE-OF-AMERICAN-PATHOLOGISTS CONFERENCE XXVI ON CLINICAL RELEVANCE OF PROGNOSTIC MARKERS IN SOLID TUMORS - REPORT OF THE COLORECTAL-CANCER WORKING GROUP, Archives of pathology and laboratory medicine, 119(12), 1995, pp. 1115-1121
Citations number
126
Categorie Soggetti
Pathology,"Medical Laboratory Technology","Medicine, Research & Experimental
Journal title
Archives of pathology and laboratory medicine
ISSN journal
00039985 → ACNP
Volume
119
Issue
12
Year of publication
1995
Pages
1115 - 1121
Database
ISI
SICI code
0003-9985(1995)119:12<1115:CCXOCR>2.0.ZU;2-E
Abstract
The College of American Pathologists Conference XXVI in June 1994 was devoted to a discussion of the clinical relevance of prognostic factor s in three solid tumors (breast, prostate, and colorectal). The group considering prognostic factors for adenocarcinoma of the large gut con sisted of 15 pathologists, investigators, and surgeons. The group conc luded that only a few items are well supported in the existing literat ure and can be recommended for routine clinical use at this time (path ologic TNM information and stage, tumor type, tumor grade, extramural venous invasion, and preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen level ). According to the classification system used at the conference, thes e markers warrant categorization as important prognostic factors (cate gory I). A few factors should be considered as potentially useful afte r further study (category II). Furthermore, the group agreed that all other current measurements of so-called prognostic factors do not warr ant the same recognition of importance, either because they have been studied insufficiently or studies have demonstrated that they do not c ontribute to prognostication. These additional items were placed in ca tegory III. It was also concluded that the statistical methods used to identify and validate prognostic markers, as well as their integratio n into single statements of prognosis, need further national evaluatio n and standardization.