173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10912931)
1. Histologic grading of breast cancer: linkage of patient outcome with level of pathologist agreement.
Dalton LW; Pinder SE; Elston CE; Ellis IO; Page DL; Dupont WD; Blamey RW
Mod Pathol; 2000 Jul; 13(7):730-5. PubMed ID: 10912931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Interobserver agreement of the Nottingham histologic grading scheme for infiltrating duct carcinoma breast.
Sikka M; Agarwal S; Bhatia A
Indian J Cancer; 1999; 36(2-4):149-53. PubMed ID: 10921219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Short- and long-term effects of a training session on pathologists' performance: the INQAT experience for histological grading in breast cancer.
Paradiso A; Ellis IO; Zito FA; Marubini E; Pizzamiglio S; Verderio P
J Clin Pathol; 2009 Mar; 62(3):279-81. PubMed ID: 19251956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Scarff-Bloom-Richardson histological grading system and the complementary value of Ki-67 to this system.
Zhang R; Chen HJ; Wei B; Zhang HY; Pang ZG; Zhu H; Zhang Z; Fu J; Bu H
Chin Med J (Engl); 2010 Aug; 123(15):1976-82. PubMed ID: 20819528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Excellent interobserver agreement on grading the extent of residual carcinoma after preoperative chemoradiation in esophageal and esophagogastric junction carcinoma: a reliable predictor for patient outcome.
Wu TT; Chirieac LR; Abraham SC; Krasinskas AM; Wang H; Rashid A; Correa AM; Hofstetter WL; Ajani JA; Swisher SG
Am J Surg Pathol; 2007 Jan; 31(1):58-64. PubMed ID: 17197919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Primary angiosarcoma of the breast: clinicopathologic analysis of 49 cases, suggesting that grade is not prognostic.
Nascimento AF; Raut CP; Fletcher CD
Am J Surg Pathol; 2008 Dec; 32(12):1896-904. PubMed ID: 18813119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quality control for histological grading in breast cancer: an Italian experience.
Italian Network for Quality Assurance of Tumour Biomarkers (INQAT) Group
Pathologica; 2005 Feb; 97(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 15918409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Relationship between tumor grade and computed architectural complexity in breast cancer specimens.
Tambasco M; Magliocco AM
Hum Pathol; 2008 May; 39(5):740-6. PubMed ID: 18439940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma.
Rakha EA; El-Sayed ME; Lee AH; Elston CW; Grainge MJ; Hodi Z; Blamey RW; Ellis IO
J Clin Oncol; 2008 Jul; 26(19):3153-8. PubMed ID: 18490649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of an increase in grading categories and double reporting on the reliability of breast cancer grade.
Chowdhury N; Pai MR; Lobo FD; Kini H; Varghese R
APMIS; 2007 Apr; 115(4):360-6. PubMed ID: 17504304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists.
Allsbrook WC; Mangold KA; Johnson MH; Lane RB; Lane CG; Amin MB; Bostwick DG; Humphrey PA; Jones EC; Reuter VE; Sakr W; Sesterhenn IA; Troncoso P; Wheeler TM; Epstein JI
Hum Pathol; 2001 Jan; 32(1):74-80. PubMed ID: 11172298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Does routine grading of invasive lobular cancer of the breast have the same prognostic significance as for ductal cancers?
Sinha PS; Bendall S; Bates T
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2000 Dec; 26(8):733-7. PubMed ID: 11087636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma. A reproducibility study.
Dalton LW; Page DL; Dupont WD
Cancer; 1994 Jun; 73(11):2765-70. PubMed ID: 8194018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A newly proposed semi-automated method of grading invasive lobular carcinoma: a unifying concept and correlation with prognostic markers and patient survival.
Stevens E; Kimler BF; Davis MK; Fan F; Thomas P; Wang XY; Damjanov I; Tawfik OW
Ann Clin Lab Sci; 2009; 39(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 19201737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Reproducibility of histoprognostic grades of invasive breast cancer].
Jacquemier J; Charpin C
Ann Pathol; 1998 Nov; 18(5):385-90. PubMed ID: 9864574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma among general pathologists.
Singh RV; Agashe SR; Gosavi AV; Sulhyan KR
Indian J Cancer; 2011; 48(4):488-95. PubMed ID: 22293266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Dysplasia as a predictive marker for invasive carcinoma in Barrett esophagus: a follow-up study based on 138 cases from a diagnostic variability study.
Montgomery E; Goldblum JR; Greenson JK; Haber MM; Lamps LW; Lauwers GY; Lazenby AJ; Lewin DN; Robert ME; Washington K; Zahurak ML; Hart J
Hum Pathol; 2001 Apr; 32(4):379-88. PubMed ID: 11331954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Excellent survival, cancer type, and Nottingham grade after atypical lobular hyperplasia on initial breast biopsy.
McLaren BK; Schuyler PA; Sanders ME; Jensen RA; Simpson JF; Dupont WD; Page DL
Cancer; 2006 Sep; 107(6):1227-33. PubMed ID: 16894523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Poor interobserver agreement in the distinction of high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in pretreatment Barrett's esophagus biopsies.
Downs-Kelly E; Mendelin JE; Bennett AE; Castilla E; Henricks WH; Schoenfield L; Skacel M; Yerian L; Rice TW; Rybicki LA; Bronner MP; Goldblum JR
Am J Gastroenterol; 2008 Sep; 103(9):2333-40; quiz 2341. PubMed ID: 18671819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
