Table 1.
Graphical representation between the reclassified categories of SEER’s 4-tier grading system to the 3-tier and 2-tier grading schemes.
| 4 to 3 tier grade comparison
|
4 to 2 tier grade comparison
|
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEER - 4 tier | FIGO - 3 tier | SS - 3 tier | SEER - 4 tier | MDAH - 2 tier | FIGO - 2 tier | SS - 2 tier | ||
|
|
|
|||||||
| Grade 1 | Low | Low | Grade 1 | Low | Low | Low | ||
|
|
|
|||||||
| Grade 2 | Intermediate | Intermediate | Grade 2 |
|
High | High | High | |
| Grade 3 |
|
High | High | Grade 3 | ||||
| Grade 4 | Grade 4 | |||||||
| Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | Unknown | ||
SEER grade 1 = well differentiated; SEER grade 2 = moderately differentiated; SEER grade 3 = poorly differentiated; SEER grade 4 = undifferentiated; FIGO, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; SS, Shimizu and Silverberg; M. D. Anderson Cancer Center