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 *

594 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30656645)

  • 1. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri.
    Bhatla N; Berek JS; Cuello Fredes M; Denny LA; Grenman S; Karunaratne K; Kehoe ST; Konishi I; Olawaiye AB; Prat J; Sankaranarayanan R; Brierley J; Mutch D; Querleu D; Cibula D; Quinn M; Botha H; Sigurd L; Rice L; Ryu HS; Ngan H; Mäenpää J; Andrijono A; Purwoto G; Maheshwari A; Bafna UD; Plante M; Natarajan J
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2019 Apr; 145(1):129-135. PubMed ID: 30656645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. [The 2019 FIGO classification for cervical carcinoma-what's new?].
    Horn LC; Brambs CE; Opitz S; Ulrich UA; Höhn AK
    Pathologe; 2019 Nov; 40(6):629-635. PubMed ID: 31612260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Clinicopathological risk factors in the light of the revised 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for early cervical cancer with staging IB: A single center retrospective study.
    Zeng J; Qu P; Hu Y; Sun P; Qi J; Zhao G; Gao Y
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2020 Apr; 99(16):e19714. PubMed ID: 32311956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Re-classification of uterine cervical cancer cases treated with radical hysterectomy based on the 2018 FIGO staging system.
    Osaku D; Komatsu H; Okawa M; Iida Y; Sato S; Oishi T; Harada T
    Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Nov; 60(6):1054-1058. PubMed ID: 34794737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Prognostic Performance of the 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Cervical Cancer Staging Guidelines.
    Wright JD; Matsuo K; Huang Y; Tergas AI; Hou JY; Khoury-Collado F; St Clair CM; Ananth CV; Neugut AI; Hershman DL
    Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Jul; 134(1):49-57. PubMed ID: 31188324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Current TNM/FIGO classification for cervical and endometrial cancer as well as malignant mixed müllerian tumors. Facts and background].
    Horn LC; Schierle K; Schmidt D; Ulrich U; Liebmann A; Wittekind C
    Pathologe; 2011 May; 32(3):239-43. PubMed ID: 20084383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The prognostic value of the presence of pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients; the influence of the new FIGO classification (stage IIIC).
    van Kol KGG; Ebisch RMF; van der Aa M; Wenzel HB; Piek JMJ; Bekkers RLM
    Gynecol Oncol; 2023 Apr; 171():9-14. PubMed ID: 36804623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Clinical analysis of 32 cases with neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix in early-stage disease].
    Wang Z; Wu L; Yao H; Sun Y; Li X; Li B; Zhang R; Ma S; Huang M
    Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Mar; 50(3):198-203. PubMed ID: 26268410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The 5-year overall survival of cervical cancer in stage IIIC-r was little different to stage I and II: a retrospective analysis from a single center.
    Yang E; Huang S; Ran X; Huang Y; Li Z
    BMC Cancer; 2021 Feb; 21(1):203. PubMed ID: 33639874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Is the revised 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer more prognostic than the 2009 FIGO staging system for women previously staged as IB disease?
    Ayhan A; Aslan K; Bulut AN; Akilli H; Öz M; Haberal A; Meydanli MM
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2019 Sep; 240():209-214. PubMed ID: 31325847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. From FIGO-2009 to FIGO-2018 in women with early-stage cervical cancer; Does the revised staging reflect risk groups?
    Sponholtz SE; Mogensen O; Hildebrandt MG; Schledermann D; Parner E; Markauskas A; Frøding LP; Fuglsang K; Holm J; Bjørnholt SM; Jensen PT
    Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Nov; 163(2):281-288. PubMed ID: 34503847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Treatment Strategies and Prognostic Factors of 2018 FIGO Stage IIIC Cervical Cancer: A Review.
    Qin F; Pang H; Yu T; Luo Y; Dong Y
    Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2022; 21():15330338221086403. PubMed ID: 35341413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Magnetic resonance imaging-based validation of the 2018 FIGO staging system in patients treated with definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced cervix cancer.
    Kim J; Cho Y; Kim N; Chung SY; Kim JW; Lee IJ; Kim YB
    Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Mar; 160(3):735-741. PubMed ID: 33358037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Improved stratification of stage-specific survival for cervical uterine cancer by integrating FDG-PET/CT and MRI for lymph node staging in 2018 FIGO classification.
    Holm J; Gerke O; Vilstrup MH; Spasojevic D; Sponholtz SE; Jochumsen KM; Thomassen A; Hildebrandt MG; Jensen PT
    Gynecol Oncol; 2022 Nov; 167(2):152-158. PubMed ID: 36182533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The upper limit of optimal tumor size in patients with FIGO 2018 stage IB2 cervical cancer undergoing radical hysterectomy.
    Hwang WY; Kim JH; Suh DH; Kim K; No JH; Kim YB
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2020 Jul; 30(7):975-980. PubMed ID: 32467336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Matched-case comparison for the role of surgery in FIGO stage Ib1-IIa squamous cell carcinoma of cervix and suspicious para-aortic lymph node metastasis.
    Kim HS; Park NH; Wu HG; Cho JY; Chung HH; Kim JW; Song YS; Kim SH; Kang SB
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2009 Jan; 16(1):133-9. PubMed ID: 18979134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Radiological evaluation of metastatic lymph nodes in carcinoma cervix with emphasis on their infiltrative pattern.
    Dhamija E; Baby A; Bhatla N; Pulappadi VP; Kumar M; Kumar S; Kumar L; Sharma D
    Indian J Med Res; 2021 Aug; 154(2):383-390. PubMed ID: 35295016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Impact of tumor histology on detection of pelvic and para-aortic nodal metastasis with
    Lin AJ; Wright JD; Dehdashti F; Siegel BA; Markovina S; Schwarz J; Thaker PH; Mutch DG; Powell MA; Grigsby PW
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2019 Nov; 29(9):1351-1354. PubMed ID: 31473660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.