Cooperation between the Surgical Oncologist and the Pathologist

  • Antonio Bolognese
  • Francesco Borrini
  • Francesca Ricci
  • Paolo Meloni
  • Federica Pulcini
  • Pietro L. Mingazzini
Part of the Updates in Surgery book series (UPDATESSURG)


The diagnosis, treatment and follow up of oncologic patients require multidisciplinary working groups made up of a dedicated team of physicians. Over the last decade the multidisciplinary treatment of oncologic diseases has become increasingly integrated and decreasingly sequential. The aim of cooperation is to provide quality treatment and produce new knowledge through both basic and clinical research and medical education.


Rectal Cancer Minimal Residual Disease Tumor Regression Grade Sentinel Node Procedure Radial Margin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rosai J (2004) Rosai and Ackerman’s Surgical Pathology. 9th ed, vol 1, Mosby, St Louis, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thompson JF, Scolyer RA (2004) Cooperation between surgical oncologist and pathologist: a key element of multidisciplinary care for patient with cancer. Pathology 36(5):496–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Qiurke P, Morris E (2007) Reporting colorectal cancer. Histopathology 50:103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ et al (2002) Rates of circunferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer. Ann Surg 235:449–457PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Bosanquet N et al (2003) The MRC CLASSIC trial: result of short-term endpoints. Br J Cancer 88:S21Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bolognese A, Barbarosos A, Borrini F et al (2001) Standardizzazione delle attuali metodiche chirurgiche ed anatomopatologiche per la rilevazione linfonodale e significato prognostico delle micrometastasi. Archivio ed Atti della Società Italiana di Chirurgia, Volume 2, Roma, pp 11–24Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bilchik AJ, Compton C (2007) Close collaboration between surgeon and pathologist is essential for accurate staging of early colon cancer. Ann Surg 245(6):864–866PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ratto C, Sofo L, Ippoliti M et al (1999) Accurate lymph-node detection in colorectal specimens resected for cancer is of prognostic significance. Dis Colon Rectum 42(2):143–154 discussion 154-158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Poller DN (2000) Method of specimen fixation and pathological dissection of colorectal cancer influences retrieval of lymph nodes and tumour nodal stage. Eur J Surg Oncol 26(8):758–762PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Noda N, Sasako M, Yamaguchi N et al (1998) Ignoring small lymph nodes can be a mejor cause of staging error in gastric cancer. Br J Surg 85:831–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liberale G, Lasser P, Sabourin JC et al (2007) Sentinel lymph nodes of colorectal carcinoma: reappraisal of 123 cases. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 31:281–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dworak O, Keilholz L, Hoffman A et al (1997) Pathological features of rectal cancer after preoperative radiochemotherapy. Int J Colorect Dis 12:19–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Benzoni E, Intersimone D, Terrosu G et al (2006) Prognostic value of tumour regression grading and depth of neoplastic infiltration within the perirectal fat after combined neoa-diuvant chemo-radiotherapy and surgery for rectal cancer. J Clin Pathol 59b:505–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kopp R, Rothbauer E, Ruge M (2003) Clinical implications of the EGF receptor/ligand system for tumor progression and survival in gastrointestinal carcinomas: evidence for new therapeutic options. Recent Results. Cancer Res 162:115–132. Review Dis Col Rectum 46:1931-1939Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    FONCaM (2003) I tumori della mammella, linee guida sulla diagnosi, il trattamento e la riabilitazione. Società Italiana di Senologia, Scientific Press, MilanGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S et al (2001) Use of chemotherapy plus monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpressed HER2. N Engl J Med 344(17):783–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smith IC, Miller ID (2001) Issue involvement in research into neoadjuvant treament for breast cancer. Anticancer Drugs 12(Suppl 1):S25–S29PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kuroi K, Toi M, Tsuda H et al (2006) Issue in the assessment of pathologic effect of primary systemic therapy for breast cancer. Breast Cancer 13:38–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bolognese A, Barbarosos A, Biacchi D et al (2002) Basi fisiopatologiche e ruolo della chirurgia oncologica nella formazione del chirurgo generale. Ann Ital Chir LXXIII 6:553–561Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Janni W, Rack B, Lindemann K et al (2005) Detection of micrometastatic disease in bone marrow: is it ready for prime time? Oncologist 10:480–492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marian Grade, Beker H, Ghadimi BM et al (2004) The impact of molecular pathology in oncology: the clinician’s perspective. Cell Oncol 26:275–278Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Bolognese
    • 1
  • Francesco Borrini
    • 1
  • Francesca Ricci
    • 1
  • Paolo Meloni
    • 1
  • Federica Pulcini
    • 1
  • Pietro L. Mingazzini
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Surgery “P. Valdoni”University of Rome “La Sapienza”RomeItaly
  2. 2.University of Rome “La Sapienza”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations