174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22367322)
1. Prognostic value of the 2009 FIGO staging for endometrial cancer: an illustration of the E3N cohort.
Koskas M; Chabbert-Buffet N; Bendifallah S; Luton D; Clavel-Chapelon F; Rouzier R
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2012 Mar; 22(3):447-51. PubMed ID: 22367322
[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. Validation of the FIGO 2009 staging system for carcinoma of the vulva.
Tan J; Chetty N; Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan S; Crandon A; Garrett A; Land R; Nascimento M; Nicklin J; Perrin L; Obermair A
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2012 Mar; 22(3):498-502. PubMed ID: 22367324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prognosis and reproducibility of new and existing binary grading systems for endometrial carcinoma compared to FIGO grading in hysterectomy specimens.
Guan H; Semaan A; Bandyopadhyay S; Arabi H; Feng J; Fathallah L; Pansare V; Qazi A; Abdul-Karim F; Morris RT; Munkarah AR; Ali-Fehmi R
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2011 May; 21(4):654-60. PubMed ID: 21543931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparative study of different histologic classifications in the degree of differentiation in endometrial adenocarcinoma.
Silva-Filho AL; Xavier ÉB; Cândido EB; Macarenco R; Ferreira MC; Xavier MA; Maciel RA; Vidigal PV
Tumori; 2016 Oct; 102(5):488-495. PubMed ID: 27514311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Significance of prognostic evaluation of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system on stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma].
Wang ZQ; Zhang Y; Wang JL; Shen DH; Mu T; Zhao X; Yao YY; Bai Y; Wei LH
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2012 Jan; 47(1):33-9. PubMed ID: 22455691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Does the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for endometrial cancer lead to increased discrimination in patient outcomes?
Cooke EW; Pappas L; Gaffney DK
Cancer; 2011 Sep; 117(18):4231-7. PubMed ID: 21387282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Value of magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative staging of endometrial carcinoma according to International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (2009) staging criteria].
Du L; Lei Y; Li D; Qiu X; Liang B
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2012 Jun; 32(7):1048-51. PubMed ID: 22820597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Impact of 2009 FIGO staging system on the diagnostic value of preoperative MRI staging of endometrial carcinoma].
Yu XD; Ouyang H; Lin M; Zhou CW; Zhang R
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2011 Sep; 33(9):692-6. PubMed ID: 22340052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Negotiating a staging and risk factor scoring system for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia. A progress report.
Kohorn EI
J Reprod Med; 2002 Jun; 47(6):445-50. PubMed ID: 12092012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. E3N, a French cohort study on cancer risk factors. E3N Group. Etude Epidémiologique auprès de femmes de l'Education Nationale.
Clavel-Chapelon F; van Liere MJ; Giubout C; Niravong MY; Goulard H; Le Corre C; Hoang LA; Amoyel J; Auquier A; Duquesnel E
Eur J Cancer Prev; 1997 Oct; 6(5):473-8. PubMed ID: 9466118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. MR staging accuracy for endometrial cancer based on the new FIGO stage.
Shin KE; Park BK; Kim CK; Bae DS; Song SY; Kim B
Acta Radiol; 2011 Sep; 52(7):818-24. PubMed ID: 21742787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Description of a novel system for grading of endometrial carcinoma and comparison with existing grading systems.
Alkushi A; Abdul-Rahman ZH; Lim P; Schulzer M; Coldman A; Kalloger SE; Miller D; Gilks CB
Am J Surg Pathol; 2005 Mar; 29(3):295-304. PubMed ID: 15725797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does the FIGO 2009 endometrial cancer staging system more accurately correlate with clinical outcome in different histologies? Revised staging, endometrial cancer, histology.
Page BR; Pappas L; Cooke EW; Gaffney DK
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2012 May; 22(4):593-8. PubMed ID: 22343970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of FIGO 1989 and 2009 recommendations on staging of endometrial carcinoma: pathologic analysis and cervical status in 123 consecutive cases.
Korczynski J; Jesionek-Kupnicka D; Gottwald L; Piekarski J
Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2011 Jul; 30(4):328-34. PubMed ID: 21623209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Pap smears in women with endometrial carcinoma.
Gu M; Shi W; Barakat RR; Thaler HT; Saigo PE
Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(4):555-60. PubMed ID: 11480718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prospective multicenter validation confirms the prognostic superiority of the endometrial carcinoma prognostic index in international Federation of gynecology and obstetrics stage 1 and 2 endometrial carcinoma.
Baak JP; Snijders W; van Diermen B; van Diest PJ; Diepenhorst FW; Benraadt J
J Clin Oncol; 2003 Nov; 21(22):4214-21. PubMed ID: 14615450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Validation of tumor size as staging variable in the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I leiomyosarcoma: a population-based study.
Garg G; Shah JP; Liu JR; Bryant CS; Kumar S; Munkarah A; Morris RT
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2010 Oct; 20(7):1201-6. PubMed ID: 20940535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prognostic impact of morphometric nuclear grade of endometrial carcinoma.
Salvesen HB; Iversen OE; Akslen LA
Cancer; 1998 Sep; 83(5):956-64. PubMed ID: 9731900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer: added benefits of MR imaging.
Beddy P; O'Neill AC; Yamamoto AK; Addley HC; Reinhold C; Sala E
Radiographics; 2012; 32(1):241-54. PubMed ID: 22236905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
