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 *

666 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30550484)

  • 1. Endometrial Carcinoma Diagnosis: Use of FIGO Grading and Genomic Subcategories in Clinical Practice: Recommendations of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists.
    Soslow RA; Tornos C; Park KJ; Malpica A; Matias-Guiu X; Oliva E; Parkash V; Carlson J; McCluggage WG; Gilks CB
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2019 Jan; 38 Suppl 1(Iss 1 Suppl 1):S64-S74. PubMed ID: 30550484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Issues in the Differential Diagnosis of Uterine Low-grade Endometrioid Carcinoma, Including Mixed Endometrial Carcinomas: Recommendations from the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists.
    Rabban JT; Gilks CB; Malpica A; Matias-Guiu X; Mittal K; Mutter GL; Oliva E; Parkash V; Ronnett BM; Staats P; Stewart CJR; McCluggage WG
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2019 Jan; 38 Suppl 1(Iss 1 Suppl 1):S25-S39. PubMed ID: 30550482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. High-grade Endometrial Carcinomas: Morphologic and Immunohistochemical Features, Diagnostic Challenges and Recommendations.
    Murali R; Davidson B; Fadare O; Carlson JA; Crum CP; Gilks CB; Irving JA; Malpica A; Matias-Guiu X; McCluggage WG; Mittal K; Oliva E; Parkash V; Rutgers JKL; Staats PN; Stewart CJR; Tornos C; Soslow RA
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2019 Jan; 38 Suppl 1(Iss 1 Suppl 1):S40-S63. PubMed ID: 30550483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The Genomic Heterogeneity of FIGO Grade 3 Endometrioid Carcinoma Impacts Diagnostic Accuracy and Reproducibility.
    Hussein YR; Broaddus R; Weigelt B; Levine DA; Soslow RA
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2016 Jan; 35(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 26166718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reproducibility of grading systems for endometrial endometrioid carcinoma and their relation with pathologic prognostic parameters.
    Kapucuoglu N; Bulbul D; Tulunay G; Temel MA
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2008; 18(4):790-6. PubMed ID: 17892460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis.
    Lax SF; Kurman RJ; Pizer ES; Wu L; Ronnett BM
    Am J Surg Pathol; 2000 Sep; 24(9):1201-8. PubMed ID: 10976693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The Significance of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Grading in Microsatellite Instability-High and POLE-Mutant Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinoma.
    Kertowidjojo E; Momeni-Boroujeni A; Rios-Doria E; Abu-Rustum N; Soslow RA
    Mod Pathol; 2023 Sep; 36(9):100234. PubMed ID: 37268062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Endometrial carcinoma: 10 years of TCGA (the cancer genome atlas): A critical reappraisal with comments on FIGO 2023 staging.
    Espinosa I; D'Angelo E; Prat J
    Gynecol Oncol; 2024 Jul; 186():94-103. PubMed ID: 38615479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [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]  

  • 12. Redefining stage I endometrial cancer: incorporating histology, a binary grading system, myometrial invasion, and lymph node assessment.
    Barlin JN; Soslow RA; Lutz M; Zhou QC; St Clair CM; Leitao MM; Iasonos A; Hensley ML; Barakat RR; Matias-Guiu X; Abu-Rustum NR
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2013 Nov; 23(9):1620-8. PubMed ID: 24126219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The reproducibility of a binary tumor grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, compared with FIGO system and nuclear grading.
    Sagae S; Saito T; Satoh M; Ikeda T; Kimura S; Mori M; Sato N; Kudo R
    Oncology; 2004; 67(5-6):344-50. PubMed ID: 15713989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Stage 1C grade 3 endometrial cancer: the KK Hospital gynaecological oncology group experience.
    Siow TR; Yeo MC; Khoo-Tan HS; Yap SP; Soong YL; Chua EJ; Soh LT; Lim YK; Chia YN; Yam KL
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2010 Dec; 20(9):1557-62. PubMed ID: 21119369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Prognosis Trend of Grade 2 Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinoma: Toward Grade 1 or 3?
    Khatib G; Gulec UK; Guzel AB; Bagir E; Paydas S; Vardar MA
    Pathol Oncol Res; 2020 Oct; 26(4):2351-2356. PubMed ID: 32488809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Perceptions of Controversies and Unresolved Issues in the 2014 FIGO Staging System for Endometrial Cancer: Survey Results From Members of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists and International Gynecologic Cancer Society.
    Kayraklioglu N; Katsakhyan L; Cohen PA; Singh N; Rabban JT; Matias-Guiu X
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2024 May; 43(3):242-252. PubMed ID: 37668357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The prognostic value of nuclear grading and the revised FIGO grading of endometrial adenocarcinoma.
    Ayhan A; Taskiran C; Yuce K; Kucukali T
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2003 Jan; 22(1):71-4. PubMed ID: 12496701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Significant variation in the assessment of cervical involvement in endometrial carcinoma: an interobserver variation study.
    McCluggage WG; Hirschowitz L; Wilson GE; Oliva E; Soslow RA; Zaino RJ
    Am J Surg Pathol; 2011 Feb; 35(2):289-94. PubMed ID: 21263250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 34.