These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22026069)

  • 1. [Current classification of malignant tumours in gynecological oncology--part I].
    Sehnal B; Driák D; Kmonícková E; Dvorská M; Hosová M; Citterbart K; Halaska M; Kolarík D
    Ceska Gynekol; 2011 Sep; 76(4):279-84. PubMed ID: 22026069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Current classification of malignant tumours in gynecological oncology--part II].
    Sehnal B; Driák D; Kmonícková E; Dvorská M; Hosová M; Citterbart K; Halaska M; Kolarík D
    Ceska Gynekol; 2011 Oct; 76(5):360-6. PubMed ID: 22132636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. History of the FIGO cancer staging system.
    Odicino F; Pecorelli S; Zigliani L; Creasman WT
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2008 May; 101(2):205-10. PubMed ID: 18199437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [The reasons of changes in revised staging for carcinoma of the vulva].
    Sehnal B; Kmoníčková E; Maxová K; Koutníková H; Driák D; Neumannová H; Bolehovská P; Sláma J
    Klin Onkol; 2013; 26(5):319-22. PubMed ID: 24107153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. TNM classification of gynaecological malignant tumours, eighth edition: changes between the seventh and eighth editions.
    Tokunaga H; Shimada M; Ishikawa M; Yaegashi N
    Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2019 Apr; 49(4):311-320. PubMed ID: 30668753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [The current staging for uterine body malignancies and its importance for clinical practice].
    Sehnal B; Benková K; Kmoníčková E; Driák D; Spůrková Z; Maxová K; Sláma J
    Cesk Patol; 2014 Apr; 50(2):100-5. PubMed ID: 24758507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The changes in FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri.
    Sehnal B; Sláma J; Kmoníčková E; Dubová O; Zikán M
    Ceska Gynekol; 2019; 84(3):216-221. PubMed ID: 31324113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Revised FIGO staging systems for gynecologic malignancies--2009 update].
    Zalewski K; Doniec J; Baranowski W; Bidziński M
    Ginekol Pol; 2010 Oct; 81(10):778-82. PubMed ID: 21117307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Which staging system to use for gynaecological cancers: a survey with recommendations for practice in the UK.
    McCluggage WG; Hirschowitz L; Ganesan R; Kehoe S; Nordin A
    J Clin Pathol; 2010 Sep; 63(9):768-70. PubMed ID: 20696685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Current FIGO Staging for Carcinoma of the Cervix Uteri and Treatment of Particular Stages.
    Sehnal B; Kmoníčková E; Sláma J; Tomancová V; Zikán M
    Klin Onkol; 2019; 32(3):224-231. PubMed ID: 31216857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Issues and inconsistencies in the revised gynecologic staging systems.
    Cole L; Stoler MH
    Semin Diagn Pathol; 2012 Aug; 29(3):167-73. PubMed ID: 23062423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Malignant gynecologic neoplasms in the Czech Republic 1986-1995].
    Bouda J; Bouda J
    Ceska Gynekol; 2000 Jan; 65(1):58-63. PubMed ID: 10750302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [TNM classification of gynecological tumors].
    Kato T; Hasumi K
    Gan To Kagaku Ryoho; 1998 Apr; 25(5):765-73. PubMed ID: 9571979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Proteomics and its importance for gynecological oncology].
    Lacheta J; Cibula D; Freitag P; Zivný J
    Ceska Gynekol; 2004 Sep; 69(5):384-7. PubMed ID: 15587895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The role of laparoscopy in staging of different gynaecological cancers.
    Tse KY; Ngan HY
    Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 2015 Aug; 29(6):884-95. PubMed ID: 25819676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Validity of the oncological cytodiagnostics and colposcopy examination versus biopsy in cervical carcinoma prevention].
    Kobilková J; Dohnalová A; Jirásek JE; Strunová M; Janoušek M; Horáček J
    Ceska Gynekol; 2012 Aug; 77(4):364-70. PubMed ID: 23094780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Primary uterine cervical cancer: correlation of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings.
    Kraljević Z; Visković K; Ledinsky M; Zadravec D; Grbavac I; Bilandzija M; Soljacić-Vranes H; Kuna K; Klasnić K; Krolo I
    Coll Antropol; 2013 Jun; 37(2):561-8. PubMed ID: 23941005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Principles of Cancer Staging for Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology.
    Gospodarowicz M; Brierley J; O'Sullivan B
    Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 2015 Aug; 29(6):767-75. PubMed ID: 26231930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Impact of the new FIGO 2009 staging classification for vulvar cancer on prognosis and stage distribution.
    Tabbaa ZM; Gonzalez J; Sznurkowski JJ; Weaver AL; Mariani A; Cliby WA
    Gynecol Oncol; 2012 Oct; 127(1):147-52. PubMed ID: 22704951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Prognostic factors of mesenchymal and mixed tumors of uterus].
    Spacek J; Laco J; Petera J; Jílek P; Krepinská E; Rezác A; Stipl S
    Ceska Gynekol; 2009 Aug; 74(4):292-7. PubMed ID: 20564985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.