Uropathology
Azadeh Rakhshan; Esmat Arvin; Sam Alahyari; Behrang Kazeminezhad; Tahmineh Mollasharifi; Alireza Bagheri; Fereshte Aliakbari; Seyed Jalil Hosseini; Mohammad Soleimani; Mahsa Ahadi; Elena Jamali; Afshin Moradi; Zahra Sadeghzadeh; Saleh Ghiasi; Malihe Nasiri; Farzad Allameh
Abstract
Background & Objective: The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (TPS) is a new method for evaluating urinary cytology designed to reduce unreproducible reports. The aim of this study was to reclassify and compare urinary cytology reports with TPS criteria to determine the frequency of unreproducible ...
Read More
Background & Objective: The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (TPS) is a new method for evaluating urinary cytology designed to reduce unreproducible reports. The aim of this study was to reclassify and compare urinary cytology reports with TPS criteria to determine the frequency of unreproducible reports compared to the previous system.Methods: In this study, the laboratory electronic registration system analyzed patients' urine samples taken by voided or washing and brushing methods. The cytological evaluation was performed considering the previous system and TPS by a pathologist. The results of the two systems were compared, and the sensitivity and specificity of TPS were calculated.Results: Urine samples were taken from 876 patients. The mean age of patients was 63.36 ± 12.62. Comparing the routine classification system and TPS, it was observed that the number of atypical reports in the TPS system decreased by 12%, and all of these cases were downgraded to the negative group in the new classification. The sensitivity and specificity of TPS were 29.4% and 95.1%, respectively, if suspected malignancy and positive reports for malignancy were considered. Finally, if positive reports for malignancy were selected, sensitivity and specificity changed to 11.8% and 100%, respectively.Conclusion: Although the TPS system has low sensitivity for the diagnosis of urothelial malignancies, due to its high specificity, it is possible to consider and use this classification for screening patients.
GI, Liver & Pancreas Pathology
Ali Yaghobi Joybari; Behnaz Behzadi; Payam Azadeh; Sam Alahyari
Abstract
Background & Objective: Currently, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgery, is the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. The use of induction chemotherapy for this tumor is controversial. In this study, the benefits and side effects of induction chemotherapy in locally ...
Read More
Background & Objective: Currently, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgery, is the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. The use of induction chemotherapy for this tumor is controversial. In this study, the benefits and side effects of induction chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer are evaluated.Methods: Twenty-nine patients with locally advanced rectal cancer in 2018-2019 were enrolled in this study. Initially, they underwent induction chemotherapy (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 every 3 weeks and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice a day for 14 days every 3 weeks for 2 courses). Then, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (radiotherapy 50.4 Gy/28 for 5 days a week concomitant with weekly oxaliplatin 50 mg/m2, as well as capecitabine 825 mg/m2/bid on the days of radiotherapy) was administered. After 4 weeks, computed tomography (CT) scan of thorax, pelvis, and abdomen with and without contrast was performed. Total mesorectal surgery was performed 6-8 weeks after the end of radiotherapy. Four courses of adjuvant chemotherapy were applied. Pathologic complete response (pCR), margin, sphincter preservation, and adverse effects were assessed.Results: In this study, pCR was present in 6 (20.7%) patients. R0 resection was done in 96.05%. Sphincter was preserved in 44.4% of lower rectal tumors. Two patients (6.9%) did not complete adjuvant treatment. Grade 3 adverse effects were documented in 13.7% of cases during induction chemotherapy and 17.2% of cases during neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Mortality was not reported.Conclusion: Induction chemotherapy, followed by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery, would be an effective and safe modality in locally advanced rectal cancer.