Many of the introductory comments in the ?rst edition of this book regarding the increasingly focused approach required of pathologists to surgical cancer histopathology reports still pertain. In the intervening period a number of trends have continued to develop that have required an update. • system-speci?c cancer multidisciplinary meetings with specialized c- nicians and appropriate pathological, radiological and oncological support. Increasingly these meetings require fewer pathologists repo- ing signi?cant numbers of relevant cases rather than a large number of pathologists reporting them only sporadically. From this has arisen cancer-speci?c lead pathologists encompassing a spectrum of speci- ist differentiation from “monospecialists” to “generalists with an int- est in” and variations in between. Cancer report datasets aimed at maintaining overall standards of reporting are freely available p- lished by various bodies, viz the Royal College of Pathologists, the As- ciation of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology and the College of American Pathologists. In the UK the Royal College Datasets are a model for standardized reporting and their success is measured by their ongoing revision and second cycle of publication. No doubt specialist and team reporting will increase, particularly as the pa- meters for each cancer type report become more complex. Datasets with their notes and attendant information are required not only to update pathologists but also to keep them aware of signi?cant pat- logy in other areas that might impact on their own specialization, e. g. metastatic carcinoma.weiterlesen