165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10921219)
1. 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]
2. Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma.
Frierson HF; Wolber RA; Berean KW; Franquemont DW; Gaffey MJ; Boyd JC; Wilbur DC
Am J Clin Pathol; 1995 Feb; 103(2):195-8. PubMed ID: 7856562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Correlation of histologic grade of breast carcinoma with cytologic features on fine-needle aspiration of the breast.
Ducatman BS; Emery ST; Wang HH
Mod Pathol; 1993 Sep; 6(5):539-43. PubMed ID: 8248109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement.
Robbins P; Pinder S; de Klerk N; Dawkins H; Harvey J; Sterrett G; Ellis I; Elston C
Hum Pathol; 1995 Aug; 26(8):873-9. PubMed ID: 7635449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Cytopathological grading, as a predictor of histopathological grade, in ductal carcinoma (NOS) of breast, on air-dried Diff-Quik smears.
Khan MZ; Haleem A; Al Hassani H; Kfoury H
Diagn Cytopathol; 2003 Oct; 29(4):185-93. PubMed ID: 14506669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of the prognostic value of Scarff-Bloom-Richardson and Nottingham histological grades in a series of 825 cases of breast cancer: major importance of the mitotic count as a component of both grading systems.
Genestie C; Zafrani B; Asselain B; Fourquet A; Rozan S; Validire P; Vincent-Salomon A; Sastre-Garau X
Anticancer Res; 1998; 18(1B):571-6. PubMed ID: 9568179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparative and evaluative study of cytological and histological grading system profile in malignant neoplasm of breast--an important prognostic factor.
Meena SP; Hemrajani DK; Joshi N
Indian J Pathol Microbiol; 2006 Apr; 49(2):199-202. PubMed ID: 16933714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [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]
13. Multicenter determination of optimal interobserver agreement using the Fuhrman grading system for renal cell carcinoma: Assessment of 241 patients with > 15-year follow-up.
Lang H; Lindner V; de Fromont M; Molinié V; Letourneux H; Meyer N; Martin M; Jacqmin D
Cancer; 2005 Feb; 103(3):625-9. PubMed ID: 15611969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative predictive value of three prognostic markers--S-phase fraction, PCNA and Mitotic count on axillary lymph node metastasis in carcinoma breast.
Pervez S; Khan MN; Nasir MI
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad; 2007; 19(1):3-5. PubMed ID: 17867469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Interobserver agreement of a probabilistic approach to reporting breast fine-needle aspirations on ThinPrep.
Gornstein B; Jacobs T; Bédard Y; Biscotti C; Ducatman B; Layfield L; McKee G; Sneige N; Wang H
Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Jun; 30(6):389-95. PubMed ID: 15176025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cytohistological correlation of grading in breast carcinoma.
Lingegowda JB; MuddeGowda PH; Ramakantha CK; Chandrasekar HR
Diagn Cytopathol; 2011 Apr; 39(4):251-7. PubMed ID: 21416638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Application of the Scarff-Bloom-Richardson tumor grading system to fine-needle aspirates of the breast.
Howell LP; Gandour-Edwards R; O'Sullivan D
Am J Clin Pathol; 1994 Mar; 101(3):262-5. PubMed ID: 8135179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
