Falzarano, Sara M.

Introduction The Florida-California Cancer Research, Education, and Engagement (CaRE 2 ) Health Equity Center is a triad partnership committed to increasing institutional capacity for cancer disparity research, the diversity of the cancer workforce, and community empowerment. This article provides an overview of the structure, process innovations, and initial outcomes from the first 4 years of the CaRE 2 triad partnership. Methods CaRE 2 serves diverse populations in Florida and California using a “molecule to the community and back” model. We prioritize research on the complex intersection of biological, environmental, and social determinants health, working together with scientific and health disparities communities, sharing expertise across institutions, bidirectional training, and community outreach. Partnership progress and outcomes were assessed using mixed methods and four Program Steering Committee meetings. Results Research capacity was increased through development of a Living Repository of 81 cancer model systems from minority patients for novel cancer drug development. CaRE 2 funded 15 scientific projects resulting in 38 publications. Workforce diversity entailed supporting 94 cancer trainees (92 URM) and 34 ESIs (32 URM) who coauthored 313 CaRE 2 -related publications and received 48 grants. Community empowerment was promoted via outreaching to more than 3000 individuals, training 145 community cancer advocates (including 28 Community Scientist Advocates), and publishing 10 community reports. CaRE 2 members and trainees together have published 639 articles, received 61 grants, and 57 awards. Conclusion The CaRE 2 partnership has achieved its initial aims. Infrastructure for translational cancer research was expanded at one partner institution, and cancer disparities research was expanded at the two cancer centers.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) undertook a critical review of the recent advances in bladder cancer focusing on important topics of high interest for the practicing surgical pathologist and urologist. This review represents the second of 2 manuscripts ensuing from this effort. Herein, we address the effective reporting of bladder cancer, focusing particularly on newly published data since the last 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. In addition, this review focuses on the importance of reporting bladder cancer with divergent differentiation and variant (subtypes of urothelial carcinoma) histologies and the potential impact on patient care. We provide new recommendations for reporting pT1 staging in diagnostic pathology. Furthermore, we explore molecular evolution and classification, emphasizing aspects that impact the understanding of important concepts relevant to reporting and management of patients.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) undertook a critical review of the recent advances in bladder neoplasia with a focus on issues relevant to the practicing surgical pathologist for the understanding and effective reporting of bladder cancer, emphasizing particularly on the newly accumulated evidence post-2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. The work is presented in 2 manuscripts. Here, in the first, we revisit the nomenclature and classification system used for grading flat and papillary urothelial lesions centering on clinical relevance, and on dilemmas related to application in routine reporting. As patients of noninvasive bladder cancer frequently undergo cystoscopy and biopsy in their typically prolonged clinical course and for surveillance of disease, we discuss morphologies presented in these scenarios which may not have readily applicable diagnostic terms in the WHO classification. The topic of inverted patterns in urothelial neoplasia, particularly when prominent or exclusive, and beyond inverted papilloma has not been addressed formally in the WHO classification. Herein we provide a through review and suggest guidelines for when and how to report such lesions. In promulgating these GUPS recommendations, we aim to provide clarity on the clinical application of these not so uncommon diagnostically challenging situations encountered in routine practice, while also importantly advocating consistent terminology which would inform future work.