Original Article

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

Multicenter determination of optimal interobserver agreement using the Fuhrman grading system for renal cell carcinoma

Assessment of 241 patients with > 15-year follow-up

  1. Hervé Lang M.D., Ph.D.1,†,*,
  2. Véronique Lindner M.D.2,
  3. Marc de Fromont M.D.3,
  4. Vincent Molinié M.D.4,
  5. Hervé Letourneux M.D.1,
  6. Nicolas Meyer M.D.5,
  7. Mael Martin M.D.1,
  8. Didier Jacqmin M.D.1

Article first published online: 20 DEC 2004

DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20812

Issue

Cancer

Cancer

Volume 103, Issue 3, pages 625–629, 1 February 2005

Additional Information

How to Cite

Lang, H., Lindner, V., de Fromont, M., Molinié, V., Letourneux, H., Meyer, N., Martin, M. and Jacqmin, D. (2005), Multicenter determination of optimal interobserver agreement using the Fuhrman grading system for renal cell carcinoma. Cancer, 103: 625–629. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20812

Author Information

  1. 1

    Department of Urology, University Hospital, Strasbourg, France

  2. 2

    Department of Pathology, University Hospital, Strasbourg, France

  3. 3

    Department of Pathology, University Hospital La Timone, Marseille, France

  4. 4

    Department of Pathology, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France

  5. 5

    Department of Medical Statistics, University Hospital, Strasbourg, France

  1. †

    Fax: (011) 33 03 88 11 61 32

*Department of Urology, Hôpitaux Universitaires, 1 Place de l'Hôpital, BP 426, F67091 Strasbourg, France

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 20 JAN 2005
  2. Article first published online: 20 DEC 2004
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 11 OCT 2004
  4. Manuscript Revised: 23 JUL 2004
  5. Manuscript Received: 19 FEB 2004

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (101K)

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Kontak JA, Campbell SC. Prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am. 2003; 30: 467–480.
  • 2
    Bostwick DG, Murphy GP. Diagnosis and prognosis of renal cell carcinoma: highlights from an international consensus workshop. Semin Urol Oncol. 1988; 16: 46–52.
  • 3
    Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1982; 6: 655–663.
  • 4
    International Union Against Cancer. TNM classification of malignant tumors (6th edition). New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.
  • 5
    Muñoz S, Bangdiwala S. Interpretation of kappa and B statistics measures of agreement. J Appl Stat. 1997; 24: 105–111.
  • 6
    Zisman A, Pantuck AJ, Dorey F, et al. Improved prognostication of renal cell carcinoma using an integrated staging system. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 1649–1657.
  • 7
    Kattan MW, Reuter V, Motzer RJ, Katz J, Russo P. A postoperative prognostic normogram for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2001; 166: 63–67.
  • 8
    Lanigan D, Conroy R, Barry-Walsh C, Loftus B, Royston D, Leader M. A comparative analysis of grading systems in renal adenocarcinoma. Histopathology. 1994; 24: 473–476.
    Direct Link:
  • 9
    Al-Aytani M, Chen V, Salama S, Shuhaibar H, Treleaven D, Vincic L. Interobserver and intraobserver variability using the Fuhrman grading system for renal cell carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003; 127: 593–596.
  • 10
    Bretheau D, Lechevallier E, de Fromont M, Sault MC, Rampal M, Coulange C. Prognostic value of nuclear grade of renal cell carcinoma. Cancer. 1995; 76: 2543–2549.
    Direct Link:
  • 11
    Goldstein NS. The current state of renal cell carcinoma grading. Cancer. 1997; 80: 977–980
    Direct Link:
  • 12
    Medeiros LJ, Gelb AB, Weiss LM. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in 121 cases. Cancer. 1988; 61: 1639–1651.
    Direct Link:
  • 13
    Ficarra V, Righetti R, Martignoni G, et al. Prognostic value of renal cell carcinoma nuclear grading: multivariate analysis of 333 cases. Urol Int. 2001; 67: 130–134
  • 14
    Grignon DJ, Ayala AG, el-Naggar AK, et al. Renal cell carcinoma: a clinicopathologic and DNA flow cytometric analysis of 103 cases. Cancer. 1989; 64: 2133–2140.
    Direct Link:
  • 15
    Gelb AB, Shibuya RB, Weiss LM, Medeiros LJ. Stage I renal cell carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study of 82 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1993; 17: 275–286.
  • 16
    Usubutun A, Uygur MC, Ayhan A, et al. Comparison of grading systems for estimating the prognosis of renal cell carcinoma. Int Urol Nephrol. 1998; 30: 391–397.
  • 17
    Dupré F, Guyétant S, Chautard D, Burtin P, Saint André JP. Prognostic value of Fuhrman's grade in renal cell carcinoma: a study of 170 cases. Ann Pathol. 1998; 18: 88–97.
  • 18
    Green LK, Ayala AG, Ro JY, et al. Role of nuclear grading in Stage I renal cell carcinoma. Urology. 1989; 34: 310–315.
  • 19
    Di Silverio F, Casale P, Colella D, Loreto A, Seccareccia F, Sciarra A. Independent value of tumor size and DNA ploidy for the prediction of disease progression in patients with organ-confined renal cell carcinoma. Cancer. 2000; 88: 835–843.
    Direct Link:
  • 20
    Minervini A, Lilas L, Minervini R, Selli C. Prognostic value of nuclear grading in patients with intracapsular (pT1-pT2) renal cell carcinoma: long-term analysis in 213 patients. Cancer. 2002; 94: 2590–2595.
    Direct Link:
  • 21
    Tsui KH, Shvarts O, Smith RB, Figlin RA, deKernion JB, Belldegrun A. Prognostic indicators for renal cell carcinoma : a multivariate analysis of 643 patients using the revised 1997 TNM staging criteria. J Urol. 2000; 163: 1090–1095.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (101K)