BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19480249)

  • 1. Risk of malignancy index for adnexal masses.
    Akdeniz N; Kuyumcuoğlu U; Kale A; Erdemoğlu M; Caca F
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2009; 30(2):178-80. PubMed ID: 19480249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses.
    Ulusoy S; Akbayir O; Numanoglu C; Ulusoy N; Odabas E; Gulkilik A
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2007 Mar; 96(3):186-91. PubMed ID: 17280665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The accuracy of risk malignancy index in prediction of malignancy in women with adnexal mass in Basrah, Iraq.
    Al-Asadi JN; Al-Maliki SK; Al-Dahhhan F; Al-Naama L; Suood F
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2018 Oct; 21(10):1254-1259. PubMed ID: 30297555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of risk of malignancy indices; RMI 1-4 in borderline ovarian tumor.
    Yenen MC; Alanbay I; Aktürk E; Ercan CM; Coksuer H; Karaşahin E; Ozan H; Dede M
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2012; 33(2):168-73. PubMed ID: 22611957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the risk malignancy index diagnostic value in patients with adnexal masses.
    Terzić M; Dotlić J; Ladjević IL; Atanacković J; Ladjević N
    Vojnosanit Pregl; 2011 Jul; 68(7):589-93. PubMed ID: 21899180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Risk of malignancy index in the evaluation of patients with adnexal masses.
    Clarke SE; Grimshaw R; Rittenberg P; Kieser K; Bentley J
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2009 May; 31(5):440-5. PubMed ID: 19604425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Role of a risk of malignancy index in clinical approaches to adnexal masses.
    Simsek HS; Tokmak A; Ozgu E; Doganay M; Danisman N; Erkaya S; Gungor T
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2014; 15(18):7793-7. PubMed ID: 25292065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Risk of malignancy index in preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses.
    Ashrafgangooei T; Rezaeezadeh M
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2011; 12(7):1727-30. PubMed ID: 22126553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules and the risk of malignancy index to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses.
    Auekitrungrueng R; Tinnangwattana D; Tantipalakorn C; Charoenratana C; Lerthiranwong T; Wanapirak C; Tongsong T
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2019 Sep; 146(3):364-369. PubMed ID: 31206642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of the Risk of Malignancy Index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses.
    van den Akker PA; Aalders AL; Snijders MP; Kluivers KB; Samlal RA; Vollebergh JH; Massuger LF
    Gynecol Oncol; 2010 Mar; 116(3):384-8. PubMed ID: 19959215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The risk of malignancy index (RMI) in women with adnexal masses in Wales.
    Abdulrahman GO; McKnight L; Lutchman Singh K
    Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Sep; 53(3):376-81. PubMed ID: 25286794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of risk of malignancy index (RMI), CA125, CA 19-9, ultrasound score, and menopausal status in borderline ovarian tumor.
    Alanbay I; Akturk E; Coksuer H; Ercan M; Karaşahin E; Dede M; Yenen MC; Ozan H; Baser I
    Gynecol Endocrinol; 2012 Jun; 28(6):478-82. PubMed ID: 22122561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Subjective assessment by ultrasound is superior to the risk of malignancy index (RMI) or the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) in discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses.
    Van Gorp T; Veldman J; Van Calster B; Cadron I; Leunen K; Amant F; Timmerman D; Vergote I
    Eur J Cancer; 2012 Jul; 48(11):1649-56. PubMed ID: 22226481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An improved risk of malignancy index in diagnosis of adnexal mass.
    Wang LM; Song H; Song X; Zhou XB
    Chin Med J (Engl); 2012 Feb; 125(3):533-5. PubMed ID: 22490416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of the predictive performance of risk of malignancy indexes 1-4, HE4 and risk of malignancy algorithm in the triage of adnexal masses.
    Hada A; Han LP; Chen Y; Hu QH; Yuan Y; Liu L
    J Ovarian Res; 2020 Apr; 13(1):46. PubMed ID: 32334618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. External validation of the adapted Risk of Malignancy Index incorporating tumor size in the preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses.
    van den Akker PA; Zusterzeel PL; Aalders AL; Snijders MP; Samlal RA; Vollebergh JH; Kluivers KB; Massuger LF
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2011 Dec; 159(2):422-5. PubMed ID: 21824712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Should cut-off values of the risk of malignancy index be changed for evaluation of adnexal masses in Asian and Pacific populations?
    Yavuzcan A; Caglar M; Ozgu E; Ustun Y; Dilbaz S; Ozdemir I; Yildiz E; Gungor T; Kumru S
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(9):5455-9. PubMed ID: 24175841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Sonographic discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses in premenopause.
    Radosa MP; Vorwergk J; Fitzgerald J; Kaehler C; Schneider U; Camara O; Runnebaum IB; Schleußner E
    Ultraschall Med; 2014 Aug; 35(4):339-44. PubMed ID: 23775448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparisons of Effectiveness in Differentiating Benign from Malignant Ovarian Masses between Conventional and Modified Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI).
    Tantipalakorn C; Tinnangwattana D; Lerthiranwong T; Luewan S; Tongsong T
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2023 Jan; 20(1):. PubMed ID: 36613208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of patients with adnexal masses.
    Andersen ES; Knudsen A; Rix P; Johansen B
    Gynecol Oncol; 2003 Jul; 90(1):109-12. PubMed ID: 12821350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.