650 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. [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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. The Many Uses of p53 Immunohistochemistry in Gynecological Pathology: Proceedings of the ISGyP Companion Society Session at the 2020 USCAP Annual9 Meeting.
Köbel M; Kang EY
Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2021 Jan; 40(1):32-40. PubMed ID: 33290354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
