162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10088542)
1. Interobserver reproducibility of the Lagios nuclear grading system for ductal carcinoma in situ.
Sneige N; Lagios MD; Schwarting R; Colburn W; Atkinson E; Weber D; Sahin A; Kemp B; Hoque A; Risin S; Sabichi A; Boone C; Dhingra K; Kelloff G; Lippman S
Hum Pathol; 1999 Mar; 30(3):257-62. PubMed ID: 10088542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reproducibility of three classification systems of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using a web-based survey.
Schuh F; Biazús JV; Resetkova E; Benfica CZ; Edelweiss MI
Pathol Res Pract; 2010 Oct; 206(10):705-11. PubMed ID: 20663616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Nuclear grade and comedo necrosis of ductal carcinoma in situ as histopathological eligible criteria for the Japan Clinical Oncology Group 1505 trial: an interobserver agreement study.
Tsuda H; Yoshida M; Akiyama F; Ohi Y; Kinowaki K; Kumaki N; Kondo Y; Saito A; Sasaki E; Nishimura R; Fujii S; Homma K; Horii R; Murata Y; Itami M; Kajita S; Kato H; Kurosumi M; Sakatani T; Shimizu S; Taniguchi K; Tamiya S; Nakamura H; Kanbayashi C; Shien T; Iwata H
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2021 Mar; 51(3):434-443. PubMed ID: 33420502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Variability in grading of ductal carcinoma in situ among an international group of pathologists.
van Seijen M; Jóźwiak K; Pinder SE; Hall A; Krishnamurthy S; Thomas JS; Collins LC; Bijron J; Bart J; Cohen D; Ng W; Bouybayoune I; Stobart H; Hudecek J; Schaapveld M; Thompson A; Lips EH; Wesseling J;
J Pathol Clin Res; 2021 May; 7(3):233-242. PubMed ID: 33620141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.
Alghamdi SA; Krishnamurthy K; Garces Narvaez SA; Algashaamy KJ; Aoun J; Reis IM; Recine MA; Jorda M; Poppiti RJ; Gomez-Fernandez CR
Am J Clin Pathol; 2020 Feb; 153(3):360-367. PubMed ID: 31769792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Dichotomous histopathological assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast results in substantial interobserver concordance.
Van Bockstal M; Baldewijns M; Colpaert C; Dano H; Floris G; Galant C; Lambein K; Peeters D; Van Renterghem S; Van Rompuy AS; Verbeke S; Verschuere S; Van Dorpe J
Histopathology; 2018 Dec; 73(6):923-932. PubMed ID: 30168167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Histopathological grading of breast ductal carcinoma in situ: validation of a web-based survey through intra-observer reproducibility analysis.
Schuh F; Biazús JV; Resetkova E; Benfica CZ; Ventura Ade F; Uchoa D; Graudenz M; Edelweiss MI
Diagn Pathol; 2015 Jul; 10():93. PubMed ID: 26159429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: reproducibility of histological subtype analysis.
Scott MA; Lagios MD; Axelsson K; Rogers LW; Anderson TJ; Page DL
Hum Pathol; 1997 Aug; 28(8):967-73. PubMed ID: 9269834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Pathologists' agreement with experts and reproducibility of breast ductal carcinoma-in-situ classification schemes.
Wells WA; Carney PA; Eliassen MS; Grove MR; Tosteson AN
Am J Surg Pathol; 2000 May; 24(5):651-9. PubMed ID: 10800983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of an e-learning module on grading variation of (pre)malignant breast lesions.
van Dooijeweert C; Deckers IAG; de Ruiter EJ; Ter Hoeve ND; Vreuls CPH; van der Wall E; van Diest PJ
Mod Pathol; 2020 Oct; 33(10):1961-1967. PubMed ID: 32404951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia Bordering on Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.
Tozbikian G; Brogi E; Vallejo CE; Giri D; Murray M; Catalano J; Olcese C; Van Zee KJ; Wen HY
Int J Surg Pathol; 2017 Apr; 25(2):100-107. PubMed ID: 27481892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Interobserver variability in upfront dichotomous histopathological assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the DCISion study.
Dano H; Altinay S; Arnould L; Bletard N; Colpaert C; Dedeurwaerdere F; Dessauvagie B; Duwel V; Floris G; Fox S; Gerosa C; Jaffer S; Kurpershoek E; Lacroix-Triki M; Laka A; Lambein K; MacGrogan GM; Marchió C; Martinez DM; Nofech-Mozes S; Peeters D; Ravarino A; Reisenbichler E; Resetkova E; Sanati S; Schelfhout AM; Schelfhout V; Shaaban AM; Sinke R; Stanciu-Pop CM; Stobbe C; van Deurzen CHM; Van de Vijver K; Van Rompuy AS; Verschuere S; Vincent-Salomon A; Wen H; Bouzin C; Galant C; Van Bockstal MR
Mod Pathol; 2020 Mar; 33(3):354-366. PubMed ID: 31534203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluating agreement, histological features, and relevance of separating pleomorphic and florid lobular carcinoma in situ subtypes.
Singh K; Paquette C; Kalife ET; Wang Y; Mangray S; Quddus MR; Steinhoff MM
Hum Pathol; 2018 Aug; 78():163-170. PubMed ID: 29753007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Deep learning-based grading of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast histopathology images.
Wetstein SC; Stathonikos N; Pluim JPW; Heng YJ; Ter Hoeve ND; Vreuls CPH; van Diest PJ; Veta M
Lab Invest; 2021 Apr; 101(4):525-533. PubMed ID: 33608619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists in categorizing ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using five classifications. European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology.
Sloane JP; Amendoeira I; Apostolikas N; Bellocq JP; Bianchi S; Boecker W; Bussolati G; Coleman D; Connolly CE; Dervan P; Eusebi V; De Miguel C; Drijkoningen M; Elston CW; Faverley D; Gad A; Jacquemier J; Lacerda M; Martinez-Penuela J; Munt C; Peterse JL; Rank F; Sylvan M; Tsakraklides V; Zafrani B
Hum Pathol; 1998 Oct; 29(10):1056-62. PubMed ID: 9781641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Histological grading of breast cancer. Interobserver, reproducibility and prognostic significance.
Theissig F; Kunze KD; Haroske G; Meyer W
Pathol Res Pract; 1990 Dec; 186(6):732-6. PubMed ID: 1964730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Histologic grading of invasive lobular carcinoma: does use of a 2-tiered nuclear grading system improve interobserver variability?
Adams AL; Chhieng DC; Bell WC; Winokur T; Hameed O
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2009 Aug; 13(4):223-5. PubMed ID: 19608079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Interobserver reproducibility in the pathologic diagnosis of borderline ductal proliferative breast diseases].
Wei B; Bu H; Zhu CR; Guo LX; Chen HJ; Zhao C; Zhang P; Chen DY; Tang Y; Jiang Y
Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2004 Nov; 35(6):849-53. PubMed ID: 15573772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports.
van Dooijeweert C; van Diest PJ; Baas IO; van der Wall E; Deckers IAG
Diagn Pathol; 2020 May; 15(1):52. PubMed ID: 32393303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Computational pathology to discriminate benign from malignant intraductal proliferations of the breast.
Dong F; Irshad H; Oh EY; Lerwill MF; Brachtel EF; Jones NC; Knoblauch NW; Montaser-Kouhsari L; Johnson NB; Rao LK; Faulkner-Jones B; Wilbur DC; Schnitt SJ; Beck AH
PLoS One; 2014; 9(12):e114885. PubMed ID: 25490766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
