Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies
  1. Home
  3. Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours: A Comparison Of Cytological Classification Systems.
  1. Home
  3. Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours: A Comparison Of Cytological Classification Systems.

Related Experiment Video

Author Spotlight: Genetically Engineered Mouse Models and Pathological Characterization of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Associated Tumors
08:57

Author Spotlight: Genetically Engineered Mouse Models and Pathological Characterization of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Associated Tumors

Published on: May 17, 2024

1.9K

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: a comparison of cytological classification systems.

Lauren Ackroyd1, Matthew Hanks1, Andrei Bancu1

  • 1Department of Cellular Pathology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.

Journal of Clinical Pathology
|May 15, 2024

View abstract on PubMed

Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The WHO classification reduced ambiguity in grading pancreatic neuroendocrine lesions. The Papanicolaou system distinguished neuroendocrine tumors from adenocarcinoma, offering management flexibility with similar accuracy to WHO for benign vs. malignant lesions.

Keywords:
ClassificationNeuroendocrinePancreatic Neoplasms

More Related Videos

Immunophenotyping of Orthotopic Homograft Syngeneic of Murine Primary KPC Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Flow Cytometry
08:30

Immunophenotyping of Orthotopic Homograft Syngeneic of Murine Primary KPC Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Flow Cytometry

Published on: October 9, 2018

12.3K
DIPLOMA Approach for Standardized Pathology Assessment of Distal Pancreatectomy Specimens
10:38

DIPLOMA Approach for Standardized Pathology Assessment of Distal Pancreatectomy Specimens

Published on: February 1, 2020

7.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Author Spotlight: Genetically Engineered Mouse Models and Pathological Characterization of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Associated Tumors
08:57

Author Spotlight: Genetically Engineered Mouse Models and Pathological Characterization of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Associated Tumors

Published on: May 17, 2024

1.9K
Immunophenotyping of Orthotopic Homograft Syngeneic of Murine Primary KPC Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Flow Cytometry
08:30

Immunophenotyping of Orthotopic Homograft Syngeneic of Murine Primary KPC Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma by Flow Cytometry

Published on: October 9, 2018

12.3K
DIPLOMA Approach for Standardized Pathology Assessment of Distal Pancreatectomy Specimens
10:38

DIPLOMA Approach for Standardized Pathology Assessment of Distal Pancreatectomy Specimens

Published on: February 1, 2020

7.4K

Area of Science:

  • Cytopathology
  • Endocrinology
  • Surgical Pathology

Background:

  • Cytological classification systems standardize the interpretation of cytological specimens.
  • Pancreatic cytology reporting commonly utilizes three systems: C1-C5, Papanicolaou, and WHO classifications.
  • Accurate classification is crucial for managing pancreatic neuroendocrine lesions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the diagnostic accuracy of three classification systems (C1-C5, Papanicolaou, WHO) for pancreatic neuroendocrine lesions.
  • To evaluate the effectiveness of each system in assessing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs).

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 73 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor resections with available cytology (n=49) over 12 years.
  • Classification of each cytology case using the C1-C5, Papanicolaou, and WHO systems.
  • Comparison of cytological classification accuracy against the final tumor grade determined at resection.

    • Main Results:

    • Papanicolaou grading classified 77.6% of lesions as neoplastic (IVB).
    • C5 and WHO grading identified 77.6% and 85.7% as malignant, respectively.
    • Resected tumors comprised 74.3% grade 1, 17.1% grade 2, and 8.6% grade 3.

    Conclusions:

    • The WHO classification demonstrated reduced ambiguity compared to C and Papanicolaou systems.
    • The Papanicolaou system effectively distinguished PNETs from pancreatic adenocarcinoma, aiding management decisions.
    • Both WHO and Papanicolaou systems showed comparable accuracy in differentiating benign from malignant lesions.