208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30181553)
1. Ki67 reproducibility using digital image analysis: an inter-platform and inter-operator study.
Acs B; Pelekanou V; Bai Y; Martinez-Morilla S; Toki M; Leung SCY; Nielsen TO; Rimm DL
Lab Invest; 2019 Jan; 99(1):107-117. PubMed ID: 30181553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Independent Clinical Validation of the Automated Ki67 Scoring Guideline from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group.
Boyaci C; Sun W; Robertson S; Acs B; Hartman J
Biomolecules; 2021 Oct; 11(11):. PubMed ID: 34827609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A Comparison of Visual Assessment and Automated Digital Image Analysis of Ki67 Labeling Index in Breast Cancer.
Zhong F; Bi R; Yu B; Yang F; Yang W; Shui R
PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0150505. PubMed ID: 26928407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sequential immunohistochemistry and virtual image reconstruction using a single slide for quantitative KI67 measurement in breast cancer.
Serna G; Simonetti S; Fasani R; Pagliuca F; Guardia X; Gallego P; Jimenez J; Peg V; Saura C; Eppenberger-Castori S; Ramon Y Cajal S; Terracciano L; Nuciforo P
Breast; 2020 Oct; 53():102-110. PubMed ID: 32707454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Digital image analysis of Ki67 proliferation index in breast cancer using virtual dual staining on whole tissue sections: clinical validation and inter-platform agreement.
Koopman T; Buikema HJ; Hollema H; de Bock GH; van der Vegt B
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 May; 169(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 29349710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Prognostic potential of automated Ki67 evaluation in breast cancer: different hot spot definitions versus true global score.
Robertson S; Acs B; Lippert M; Hartman J
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2020 Aug; 183(1):161-175. PubMed ID: 32572716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A methodology to ensure and improve accuracy of Ki67 labelling index estimation by automated digital image analysis in breast cancer tissue.
Laurinavicius A; Plancoulaine B; Laurinaviciene A; Herlin P; Meskauskas R; Baltrusaityte I; Besusparis J; Dasevicius D; Elie N; Iqbal Y; Bor C
Breast Cancer Res; 2014; 16(2):R35. PubMed ID: 24708745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Systematically higher Ki67 scores on core biopsy samples compared to corresponding resection specimen in breast cancer: a multi-operator and multi-institutional study.
Acs B; Leung SCY; Kidwell KM; Arun I; Augulis R; Badve SS; Bai Y; Bane AL; Bartlett JMS; Bayani J; Bigras G; Blank A; Buikema H; Chang MC; Dietz RL; Dodson A; Fineberg S; Focke CM; Gao D; Gown AM; Gutierrez C; Hartman J; Kos Z; Lænkholm AV; Laurinavicius A; Levenson RM; Mahboubi-Ardakani R; Mastropasqua MG; Nofech-Mozes S; Osborne CK; Penault-Llorca FM; Piper T; Quintayo MA; Rau TT; Reinhard S; Robertson S; Salgado R; Sugie T; van der Vegt B; Viale G; Zabaglo LA; Hayes DF; Dowsett M; Nielsen TO; Rimm DL;
Mod Pathol; 2022 Oct; 35(10):1362-1369. PubMed ID: 35729220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Ki67 dilemma: investigating prognostic cut-offs and reproducibility for automated Ki67 scoring in breast cancer.
Rewcastle E; Skaland I; Gudlaugsson E; Fykse SK; Baak JPA; Janssen EAM
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38797793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Validity and reliability of Ki-67 assessment in oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer.
Jing N; Fang C; Williams DS
Pathology; 2017 Jun; 49(4):371-378. PubMed ID: 28450087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reproducibility and Prognostic Potential of Ki-67 Proliferation Index when Comparing Digital-Image Analysis with Standard Semi-Quantitative Evaluation in Breast Cancer.
Ács B; Madaras L; Kovács KA; Micsik T; Tőkés AM; Győrffy B; Kulka J; Szász AM
Pathol Oncol Res; 2018 Jan; 24(1):115-127. PubMed ID: 28401450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reliability of Ki67 visual scoring app compared to eyeball estimate and digital image analysis and its prognostic significance in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.
Arun I; Venkatesh S; Ahmed R; Agrawal SK; Leung SCY
APMIS; 2021 Aug; 129(8):489-502. PubMed ID: 34053140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Objective quantification of the Ki67 proliferative index in neuroendocrine tumors of the gastroenteropancreatic system: a comparison of digital image analysis with manual methods.
Tang LH; Gonen M; Hedvat C; Modlin IM; Klimstra DS
Am J Surg Pathol; 2012 Dec; 36(12):1761-70. PubMed ID: 23026928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Ki-67 Proliferation Index Assessment in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors by Digital Image Analysis With Stringent Case and Hotspot Level Concordance Requirements.
Boukhar SA; Gosse MD; Bellizzi AM; Rajan K D A
Am J Clin Pathol; 2021 Sep; 156(4):607-619. PubMed ID: 33847759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An international multicenter study to evaluate reproducibility of automated scoring for assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer.
Rimm DL; Leung SCY; McShane LM; Bai Y; Bane AL; Bartlett JMS; Bayani J; Chang MC; Dean M; Denkert C; Enwere EK; Galderisi C; Gholap A; Hugh JC; Jadhav A; Kornaga EN; Laurinavicius A; Levenson R; Lima J; Miller K; Pantanowitz L; Piper T; Ruan J; Srinivasan M; Virk S; Wu Y; Yang H; Hayes DF; Nielsen TO; Dowsett M
Mod Pathol; 2019 Jan; 32(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 30143750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An interobserver reproducibility analysis of size-set semiautomatic counting for Ki67 assessment in breast cancer.
Wang YX; Wang YY; Yang CG; Bu H; Yang WT; Wang L; Xu WM; Zhao XL; Zhao WX; Li L; Song SL; Yang JL
Breast; 2020 Feb; 49():225-232. PubMed ID: 31911370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Improving Ki67 assessment concordance by the use of an artificial intelligence-empowered microscope: a multi-institutional ring study.
Cai L; Yan K; Bu H; Yue M; Dong P; Wang X; Li L; Tian K; Shen H; Zhang J; Shang J; Niu S; Han D; Ren C; Huang J; Han X; Yao J; Liu Y
Histopathology; 2021 Oct; 79(4):544-555. PubMed ID: 33840132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reliability and Variability of Ki-67 Digital Image Analysis Methods for Clinical Diagnostics in Breast Cancer.
Dawe M; Shi W; Liu TY; Lajkosz K; Shibahara Y; Gopal NEK; Geread R; Mirjahanmardi S; Wei CX; Butt S; Abdalla M; Manolescu S; Liang SB; Chadwick D; Roehrl MHA; McKee TD; Adeoye A; McCready D; Khademi A; Liu FF; Fyles A; Done SJ
Lab Invest; 2024 May; 104(5):100341. PubMed ID: 38280634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An international Ki67 reproducibility study.
Polley MY; Leung SC; McShane LM; Gao D; Hugh JC; Mastropasqua MG; Viale G; Zabaglo LA; Penault-Llorca F; Bartlett JM; Gown AM; Symmans WF; Piper T; Mehl E; Enos RA; Hayes DF; Dowsett M; Nielsen TO;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Dec; 105(24):1897-906. PubMed ID: 24203987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The human-in-the-loop: an evaluation of pathologists' interaction with artificial intelligence in clinical practice.
Bodén ACS; Molin J; Garvin S; West RA; Lundström C; Treanor D
Histopathology; 2021 Aug; 79(2):210-218. PubMed ID: 33590577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
