273 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19255317)
21. Comparing survival outcomes for cervical cancer based on the 2014 and 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging systems.
Shin W; Ham TY; Park YR; Lim MC; Won YJ
Sci Rep; 2021 Mar; 11(1):6988. PubMed ID: 33772044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Cervical Cancer: 2018 Revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Staging System and the Role of Imaging.
Saleh M; Virarkar M; Javadi S; Elsherif SB; de Castro Faria S; Bhosale P
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 May; 214(5):1182-1195. PubMed ID: 32182097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Clinicopathologic Factors of Cervical Adenocarcinoma Stages IB to IIB.
Mabuchi Y; Yahata T; Kobayashi A; Tanizaki Y; Shiro M; Ota N; Yagi S; Minami S; Ino K
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2015 Nov; 25(9):1677-82. PubMed ID: 26495760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [Clinical significance of the revised international federation of gynecology and obstetrics staging system 2009].
Shen K; Peng P; Wu M
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2010 Oct; 45(10):721-4. PubMed ID: 21176549
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Prognostic factors and outcomes in 28 cases of uterine leiomyosarcoma.
Loizzi V; Cormio G; Nestola D; Falagario M; Surgo A; Camporeale A; Putignano G; Selvaggi L
Oncology; 2011; 81(2):91-7. PubMed ID: 21968290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Risk factors for survival of head and neck soft tissue sarcomas: A comparison between 7th and 8th edition AJCC staging systems.
Ku JY; Roh JL; Cho KJ; Song JS; Choi SH; Nam SY; Kim SY
Oral Oncol; 2020 Jul; 106():104705. PubMed ID: 32298997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Magnetic resonance imaging-based validation of the 2018 FIGO staging system in patients treated with definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced cervix cancer.
Kim J; Cho Y; Kim N; Chung SY; Kim JW; Lee IJ; Kim YB
Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Mar; 160(3):735-741. PubMed ID: 33358037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. A Risk Stratification for Patients with Cervical Cancer in Stage IIIC1 of the 2018 FIGO Staging System.
Liu X; Wang W; Hu K; Zhang F; Hou X; Yan J; Meng Q; Zhou Z; Miao Z; Guan H; Ma J; Shen J; Zhen H; Wang W
Sci Rep; 2020 Jan; 10(1):362. PubMed ID: 31941966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Prognostic factors and survival outcomes of women with uterine leiomyosarcoma: A Turkish Uterine Sarcoma Group Study-003.
Ayhan A; Gungorduk K; Khatib G; Fırat Cüylan Z; Boran N; Gökçü M; Çelik H; Özgül N; Akbayir Ö; Şimşek T; Bakay A; Faruk Köse M; Tunç M; Küçükgöz Güleç Ü; Koç S; Kuşçu E; Vardar MA; Akilli H; Taskiran C; Mutlu Meydanlı M
Curr Probl Cancer; 2021 Oct; 45(5):100712. PubMed ID: 33685725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The local treatment modalities in FIGO stage I-II small-cell carcinoma of the cervix are determined by disease stage and lymph node status.
Zhou J; Yang HY; Wu SG; He ZY; Lin HX; Sun JY; Li Q; Guo ZW
Cancer Med; 2016 Jun; 5(6):1108-15. PubMed ID: 26990881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Differentiation of survival outcomes by anatomic involvement and histology with the revised 2023 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for endometrial cancer.
Gravbrot N; Weil CR; DeCesaris CM; Gaffney DK; Suneja G; Burt LM
Eur J Cancer; 2024 Apr; 201():113913. PubMed ID: 38377777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Effectiveness of adjuvant treatment for morcellated, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I uterine leiomyosarcoma: A Korean multicenter study.
Kim SI; Choi CH; Kim K; Hong DH; Park JY; Kwon BS; Lee KH; Hong DG; Shin SJ; Park SI; Kim YH; Lee SH; Lee S; Hong JH; Lee JY; Kim YB; No JH; Suh DH
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2020 Feb; 46(2):337-346. PubMed ID: 31814199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Prognostic value of the 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer patients with surgical risk factors.
Yan DD; Tang Q; Chen JH; Tu YQ; Lv XJ
Cancer Manag Res; 2019; 11():5473-5480. PubMed ID: 31354353
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Data from small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix: FIGO 2018 staging is more accurate than FIGO 2009.
Zhang Y; Ding J; Hua K
J Int Med Res; 2022 Jan; 50(1):3000605211067397. PubMed ID: 34986672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The tumor-stroma ratio is an independent predictor of survival in patients with 2018 FIGO stage IIIC squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix following primary radical surgery.
Zong L; Zhang Q; Kong Y; Yang F; Zhou Y; Yu S; Wu M; Chen J; Zhang Y; Xiang Y
Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Mar; 156(3):676-681. PubMed ID: 31882242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The new (Version 9) American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor, node, metastasis staging for cervical cancer.
Olawaiye AB; Baker TP; Washington MK; Mutch DG
CA Cancer J Clin; 2021 Jul; 71(4):287-298. PubMed ID: 33784415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of AJCC 1988 and 1997 classifications for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. American Joint Committee on Cancer.
Ozyar E; Yildiz F; Akyol FH; Atahan IL
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1999 Jul; 44(5):1079-87. PubMed ID: 10421542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system.
Matsuo K; Machida H; Mandelbaum RS; Konishi I; Mikami M
Gynecol Oncol; 2019 Jan; 152(1):87-93. PubMed ID: 30389105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. FIGO stage, histology, histologic grade, age and race as prognostic factors in determining survival for cancers of the female gynecological system: an analysis of 1973-87 SEER cases of cancers of the endometrium, cervix, ovary, vulva, and vagina.
Kosary CL
Semin Surg Oncol; 1994; 10(1):31-46. PubMed ID: 8115784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. A novel lymph node staging system for gastric cancer including modified Union for cancer Control/American Joint Committee on cancer and Japanese Gastric Cancer Association criteria.
Gong Y; Pan S; Wang X; Zhu G; Xu H; Zhu Z
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2020 Oct; 46(10 Pt B):e27-e32. PubMed ID: 32631708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]