对 R 分类的误解--对治疗乳腺癌的专科医师的调查。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 PATHOLOGY
Sandra Sunitsch, Philipp Fischer, Gudrun Pregartner, Peter Regitnig
{"title":"对 R 分类的误解--对治疗乳腺癌的专科医师的调查。","authors":"Sandra Sunitsch, Philipp Fischer, Gudrun Pregartner, Peter Regitnig","doi":"10.1007/s00428-024-03876-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Frequent discussions in the tumour board about the Residual tumour (R) Classification of the UICC's \"TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours\", especially in the case of breast surgery specimens, raised the question about differing interpretations amongst different medical specialties. Thus, we designed a survey about the R Classification with a special focus on breast cancer specimens. An online survey was conducted, where a web link to the survey was distributed via email to various medical professional societies dealing with breast cancer in Austria and Germany with the request to distribute the link to their members. The study population consisted of physicians of all educational levels of different medical professions, who deal with breast carcinomas in their daily routine. Two hundred two participants, of which 160 (79.2%) have more than 10 years' professional experience, took part in the survey; 88 (43.6%) were surgeons/gynaecologists, 80 (39.6%) pathologists, 19 (9.4%) radiation oncologists/ therapists, 8 (4.0%) radiologists, and 7 (3.5%) oncologists. We show that the R Classification is not completely mastered by anyone and that there are significant differences in the interpretation of the R Classification between different medical specialties. For better differentiation between the residual tumour (R Classification) of the TNM and a pure resection margin assessment, we suggest the use of a Resection margin (Rm) Classification to avoid further misunderstandings. To assist better multidisciplinary cooperation and to ensure better patient care all medical disciplines should be educated about the actual meaning and correct application of the R Classification.</p>","PeriodicalId":23514,"journal":{"name":"Virchows Archiv","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The misunderstanding of the R Classification-a survey amongst medical specialties treating breast cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Sunitsch, Philipp Fischer, Gudrun Pregartner, Peter Regitnig\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00428-024-03876-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Frequent discussions in the tumour board about the Residual tumour (R) Classification of the UICC's \\\"TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours\\\", especially in the case of breast surgery specimens, raised the question about differing interpretations amongst different medical specialties. Thus, we designed a survey about the R Classification with a special focus on breast cancer specimens. An online survey was conducted, where a web link to the survey was distributed via email to various medical professional societies dealing with breast cancer in Austria and Germany with the request to distribute the link to their members. The study population consisted of physicians of all educational levels of different medical professions, who deal with breast carcinomas in their daily routine. Two hundred two participants, of which 160 (79.2%) have more than 10 years' professional experience, took part in the survey; 88 (43.6%) were surgeons/gynaecologists, 80 (39.6%) pathologists, 19 (9.4%) radiation oncologists/ therapists, 8 (4.0%) radiologists, and 7 (3.5%) oncologists. We show that the R Classification is not completely mastered by anyone and that there are significant differences in the interpretation of the R Classification between different medical specialties. For better differentiation between the residual tumour (R Classification) of the TNM and a pure resection margin assessment, we suggest the use of a Resection margin (Rm) Classification to avoid further misunderstandings. To assist better multidisciplinary cooperation and to ensure better patient care all medical disciplines should be educated about the actual meaning and correct application of the R Classification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Virchows Archiv\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Virchows Archiv\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-024-03876-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virchows Archiv","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-024-03876-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肿瘤委员会经常讨论 UICC 的 "恶性肿瘤 TNM 分类 "中的残留肿瘤(R)分类,尤其是在乳腺手术标本中,这引起了不同医学专科之间存在不同解释的问题。因此,我们设计了一项关于 R 分类的调查,特别关注乳腺癌标本。我们进行了一次在线调查,通过电子邮件向奥地利和德国从事乳腺癌研究的各医学专业协会发送了调查的网络链接,并要求他们将链接分发给会员。研究对象包括在日常工作中处理乳腺癌的不同医疗专业、不同教育程度的医生。共有 222 人参加了调查,其中 160 人(79.2%)拥有 10 年以上的专业经验;88 人(43.6%)是外科医生/妇科医生,80 人(39.6%)是病理学家,19 人(9.4%)是放射肿瘤学家/治疗师,8 人(4.0%)是放射科医生,7 人(3.5%)是肿瘤学家。我们的研究表明,并不是所有人都能完全掌握 R 分类法,而且不同医学专科对 R 分类法的解释也存在显著差异。为了更好地区分 TNM 的残余肿瘤(R 分类)和单纯的切除边缘评估,我们建议使用切除边缘(Rm)分类,以避免进一步的误解。为了更好地开展多学科合作,确保为患者提供更好的治疗,所有医学学科都应了解 R 分类的实际含义和正确应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The misunderstanding of the R Classification-a survey amongst medical specialties treating breast cancer.

The misunderstanding of the R Classification-a survey amongst medical specialties treating breast cancer.

Frequent discussions in the tumour board about the Residual tumour (R) Classification of the UICC's "TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours", especially in the case of breast surgery specimens, raised the question about differing interpretations amongst different medical specialties. Thus, we designed a survey about the R Classification with a special focus on breast cancer specimens. An online survey was conducted, where a web link to the survey was distributed via email to various medical professional societies dealing with breast cancer in Austria and Germany with the request to distribute the link to their members. The study population consisted of physicians of all educational levels of different medical professions, who deal with breast carcinomas in their daily routine. Two hundred two participants, of which 160 (79.2%) have more than 10 years' professional experience, took part in the survey; 88 (43.6%) were surgeons/gynaecologists, 80 (39.6%) pathologists, 19 (9.4%) radiation oncologists/ therapists, 8 (4.0%) radiologists, and 7 (3.5%) oncologists. We show that the R Classification is not completely mastered by anyone and that there are significant differences in the interpretation of the R Classification between different medical specialties. For better differentiation between the residual tumour (R Classification) of the TNM and a pure resection margin assessment, we suggest the use of a Resection margin (Rm) Classification to avoid further misunderstandings. To assist better multidisciplinary cooperation and to ensure better patient care all medical disciplines should be educated about the actual meaning and correct application of the R Classification.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Virchows Archiv
Virchows Archiv 医学-病理学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
2.90%
发文量
204
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Manuscripts of original studies reinforcing the evidence base of modern diagnostic pathology, using immunocytochemical, molecular and ultrastructural techniques, will be welcomed. In addition, papers on critical evaluation of diagnostic criteria but also broadsheets and guidelines with a solid evidence base will be considered. Consideration will also be given to reports of work in other fields relevant to the understanding of human pathology as well as manuscripts on the application of new methods and techniques in pathology. Submission of purely experimental articles is discouraged but manuscripts on experimental work applicable to diagnostic pathology are welcomed. Biomarker studies are welcomed but need to abide by strict rules (e.g. REMARK) of adequate sample size and relevant marker choice. Single marker studies on limited patient series without validated application will as a rule not be considered. Case reports will only be considered when they provide substantial new information with an impact on understanding disease or diagnostic practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信