106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14703284)
1. The comparison of the agreement in determining the histological grade of uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, using the three-grade FIGO classification and the two-grade system.
Demczuk S; Wierzchowski W; Szczepański W; Dyduch G; Czopek J; Stachura J
Pol J Pathol; 2003; 54(3):179-81. PubMed ID: 14703284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prognostic significance and interobserver variability of histologic grading systems for endometrial carcinoma.
Scholten AN; Smit VT; Beerman H; van Putten WL; Creutzberg CL
Cancer; 2004 Feb; 100(4):764-72. PubMed ID: 14770433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The reproducibility of histological parameters employed in the novel binary grading systems of endometrial cancer.
Gemer O; Uriev L; Voldarsky M; Gdalevich M; Ben-Dor D; Barak F; Anteby EY; Lavie O
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2009 Mar; 35(3):247-51. PubMed ID: 18775628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The reproducibility of a binary tumor grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, compared with FIGO system and nuclear grading.
Sagae S; Saito T; Satoh M; Ikeda T; Kimura S; Mori M; Sato N; Kudo R
Oncology; 2004; 67(5-6):344-50. PubMed ID: 15713989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Prognostic impact of histological grade and vascular invasion compared with tumour cell proliferation in endometrial carcinoma of endometrioid type.
Stefansson IM; Salvesen HB; Immervoll H; Akslen LA
Histopathology; 2004 May; 44(5):472-9. PubMed ID: 15139995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis.
Lax SF; Kurman RJ; Pizer ES; Wu L; Ronnett BM
Am J Surg Pathol; 2000 Sep; 24(9):1201-8. PubMed ID: 10976693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An analysis of two versus three grades for endometrial carcinoma.
Taylor RR; Zeller J; Lieberman RW; O'Connor DM
Gynecol Oncol; 1999 Jul; 74(1):3-6. PubMed ID: 10385544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Significant variation in the assessment of cervical involvement in endometrial carcinoma: an interobserver variation study.
McCluggage WG; Hirschowitz L; Wilson GE; Oliva E; Soslow RA; Zaino RJ
Am J Surg Pathol; 2011 Feb; 35(2):289-94. PubMed ID: 21263250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Architectural versus nuclear atypia-defined FIGO grade 2 endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma (EEC): a clinicopathologic comparison of 154 cases with clinical follow-up.
Winham WM; Lin D; Stone PJ; Nucci MR; Quick CM
Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2014 Mar; 33(2):120-6. PubMed ID: 24487465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Endometrial carcinosarcomas have a different prognosis and pattern of spread compared to high-risk epithelial endometrial cancer.
Amant F; Cadron I; Fuso L; Berteloot P; de Jonge E; Jacomen G; Van Robaeys J; Neven P; Moerman P; Vergote I
Gynecol Oncol; 2005 Aug; 98(2):274-80. PubMed ID: 15972232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical prognostic factors and expression of cathepsin D in endometrioid adenocarcinoma.
Dvalishvili I; Charkviani L; Charkviani T; Turashvili G; Burkadze G
Georgian Med News; 2005 Sep; (126):27-31. PubMed ID: 16234588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reproducibility of grading systems for endometrial endometrioid carcinoma and their relation with pathologic prognostic parameters.
Kapucuoglu N; Bulbul D; Tulunay G; Temel MA
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2008; 18(4):790-6. PubMed ID: 17892460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinical characteristics of prognostic factors in uterine endometrioid adenocarcinoma of various grade.
Dvalishvili I; Charkviani L; Turashvili G; Burkadze G
Georgian Med News; 2006 Mar; (132):24-7. PubMed ID: 16636372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Expert system support using a Bayesian belief network for the classification of endometrial hyperplasia.
Morrison ML; McCluggage WG; Price GJ; Diamond J; Sheeran MR; Mulholland KM; Walsh MY; Montironi R; Bartels PH; Thompson D; Hamilton PW
J Pathol; 2002 Jul; 197(3):403-14. PubMed ID: 12115888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Stage II endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium: clinical implications of cervical stromal invasion.
Orezzoli JP; Sioletic S; Olawaiye A; Oliva E; del Carmen MG
Gynecol Oncol; 2009 Jun; 113(3):316-23. PubMed ID: 19345400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Accuracy of preoperative endometrial sampling diagnosis of FIGO grade 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma.
Leitao MM; Kehoe S; Barakat RR; Alektiar K; Gattoc LP; Rabbitt C; Chi DS; Soslow RA; Abu-Rustum NR
Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Nov; 111(2):244-8. PubMed ID: 18752842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. TGF-beta signaling is disrupted in endometrioid-type endometrial carcinomas.
Piestrzeniewicz-Ulanska D; Brys M; Semczuk A; Rechberger T; Jakowicki JA; Krajewska WM
Gynecol Oncol; 2004 Oct; 95(1):173-80. PubMed ID: 15385128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Tumor cell type can be reproducibly diagnosed and is of independent prognostic significance in patients with maximally debulked ovarian carcinoma.
Gilks CB; Ionescu DN; Kalloger SE; Köbel M; Irving J; Clarke B; Santos J; Le N; Moravan V; Swenerton K;
Hum Pathol; 2008 Aug; 39(8):1239-51. PubMed ID: 18602670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Development of metastatic endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma while on progestin therapy for endometrial hyperplasia.
Rubatt JM; Slomovitz BM; Burke TW; Broaddus RR
Gynecol Oncol; 2005 Nov; 99(2):472-6. PubMed ID: 16099019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Genomic Heterogeneity of FIGO Grade 3 Endometrioid Carcinoma Impacts Diagnostic Accuracy and Reproducibility.
Hussein YR; Broaddus R; Weigelt B; Levine DA; Soslow RA
Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2016 Jan; 35(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 26166718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
