136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2187298)
1. Morphometrically estimated variation in nuclear size. A useful tool in grading prostatic cancer.
Blom JH; Ten Kate FJ; Schroeder FH; van der Heul RO
Urol Res; 1990; 18(2):93-9. PubMed ID: 2187298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Grading of prostatic cancer (I): An analysis of the prognostic significance of single characteristics.
Schroeder FH; Blom JH; Hop WC; Mostofi FK
Prostate; 1985; 6(1):81-100. PubMed ID: 3969374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Lack of association of prostate carcinoma nuclear grading with prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy.
Zhou M; Hayasaka S; Taylor JM; Shah R; Proverbs-Singh T; Manley S; Rubin MA
J Urol; 2001 Dec; 166(6):2193-7. PubMed ID: 11696734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Combined histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma.
Böcking A; Kiehn J; Heinzel-Wach M
Cancer; 1982 Jul; 50(2):288-94. PubMed ID: 7083133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Nuclear morphometry in histological specimens of canine prostate cancer: Correlation with histological subtypes, Gleason score, methods of collection and survival time.
Di Donato G; Laufer-Amorim R; Palmieri C
Res Vet Sci; 2017 Oct; 114():212-217. PubMed ID: 28502900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Contemporary Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: An Update With Discussion on Practical Issues to Implement the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.
Epstein JI; Amin MB; Reuter VE; Humphrey PA
Am J Surg Pathol; 2017 Apr; 41(4):e1-e7. PubMed ID: 28177964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Histopathology of localized prostate cancer. Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Prognostic Parameters in Localized Prostate Cancer. Stockholm, Sweden, May 12-13, 1993.
Murphy GP; Busch C; Abrahamsson PA; Epstein JI; McNeal JE; Miller GJ; Mostofi FK; Nagle RB; Nordling S; Parkinson C
Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl; 1994; 162():7-42; discussion 115-27. PubMed ID: 7817162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Stereologically estimated mean nuclear volume of prostatic cancer is a reliable prognostic parameter.
Arima K; Sugimura Y; Hioki T; Yamashita A; Kawamura J
Br J Cancer; 1997; 76(2):234-7. PubMed ID: 9231924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Histological evaluation of prostatic cancer. (II): Reproducibility of a histological grading system.
Svanholm H; Starklint H; Barlebo H; Olsen S
APMIS; 1990 Mar; 98(3):229-36. PubMed ID: 2317346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. SOCS3 Immunohistochemical Expression Seems to Support the 2005 and 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Modified Gleason Grading System.
Pierconti F; Martini M; Cenci T; Petrone GL; Ricci R; Sacco E; Bassi PF; Larocca LM
Prostate; 2017 May; 77(6):597-603. PubMed ID: 28144985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma.
Böcking A; Sinagowitz E
Pathol Res Pract; 1980; 168(1-3):115-25. PubMed ID: 7433250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Significance of Accurate Determination of Gleason Score for Therapeutic Options and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer.
Helpap B; Ringli D; Tonhauser J; Poser I; Breul J; Gevensleben H; Seifert HH
Pathol Oncol Res; 2016 Apr; 22(2):349-56. PubMed ID: 26563277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Stromogenic prostatic carcinoma pattern (carcinomas with reactive stromal grade 3) in needle biopsies predicts biochemical recurrence-free survival in patients after radical prostatectomy.
Yanagisawa N; Li R; Rowley D; Liu H; Kadmon D; Miles BJ; Wheeler TM; Ayala GE
Hum Pathol; 2007 Nov; 38(11):1611-20. PubMed ID: 17868773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Significance and outcome of nuclear anaplasia and mitotic index in prostatic adenocarcinomas.
Kır G; Sarbay BC; Gumus E
Urol Oncol; 2016 Oct; 34(10):430.e9-430.e16. PubMed ID: 27264167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Nuclear roundness factor: a quantitative approach to grading in prostatic carcinoma, reliability of needle biopsy tissue, and the effect of tumor stage on usefulness.
Clark TD; Askin FB; Bagnell CR
Prostate; 1987; 10(3):199-206. PubMed ID: 3588411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Histologic grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: intraobserver reproducibility of the Mostofi, Gleason and Böcking grading systems.
Cintra ML; Billis A
Int Urol Nephrol; 1991; 23(5):449-54. PubMed ID: 1938244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prediction of prognosis in untreated stage A2 prostatic carcinoma.
Mohler JL; Partin AW; Epstein JI; Becker RL; Mikel UV; Sesterhenn IA; Mostofi FK; Gleason DF; Sharief Y; Coffey DS
Cancer; 1992 Jan; 69(2):511-9. PubMed ID: 1728382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. A report of the workshops on the current status of the histologic grading of prostate cancer.
Murphy GP; Whitmore WF
Cancer; 1979 Oct; 44(4):1490-4. PubMed ID: 498023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Histological grading of prostatic carcinoma in prostatectomy specimens. Comparison of prognostic accuracy of five grading systems.
Gallee MP; Ten Kate FJ; Mulder PG; Blom JH; van der Heul RO
Br J Urol; 1990 Apr; 65(4):368-75. PubMed ID: 2340371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
