179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31655171)
1. Interobserver variability in breast carcinoma grading results in prognostic stage differences.
Rabe K; Snir OL; Bossuyt V; Harigopal M; Celli R; Reisenbichler ES
Hum Pathol; 2019 Dec; 94():51-57. PubMed ID: 31655171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma: a multi-institution study of interobserver variation using virtual microscopy.
Ginter PS; Idress R; D'Alfonso TM; Fineberg S; Jaffer S; Sattar AK; Chagpar A; Wilson P; Harigopal M
Mod Pathol; 2021 Apr; 34(4):701-709. PubMed ID: 33077923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Variability in grading of ductal carcinoma in situ among an international group of pathologists.
van Seijen M; Jóźwiak K; Pinder SE; Hall A; Krishnamurthy S; Thomas JS; Collins LC; Bijron J; Bart J; Cohen D; Ng W; Bouybayoune I; Stobart H; Hudecek J; Schaapveld M; Thompson A; Lips EH; Wesseling J;
J Pathol Clin Res; 2021 May; 7(3):233-242. PubMed ID: 33620141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Histologic grading of invasive lobular carcinoma: does use of a 2-tiered nuclear grading system improve interobserver variability?
Adams AL; Chhieng DC; Bell WC; Winokur T; Hameed O
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2009 Aug; 13(4):223-5. PubMed ID: 19608079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Concordance in Breast Cancer Grading by Artificial Intelligence on Whole Slide Images Compares With a Multi-Institutional Cohort of Breast Pathologists.
Mantrala S; Ginter PS; Mitkari A; Joshi S; Prabhala H; Ramachandra V; Kini L; Idress R; D'Alfonso TM; Fineberg S; Jaffer S; Sattar AK; Chagpar AB; Wilson P; Singh K; Harigopal M; Koka D
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2022 Nov; 146(11):1369-1377. PubMed ID: 35271701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Dichotomous histopathological assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast results in substantial interobserver concordance.
Van Bockstal M; Baldewijns M; Colpaert C; Dano H; Floris G; Galant C; Lambein K; Peeters D; Van Renterghem S; Van Rompuy AS; Verbeke S; Verschuere S; Van Dorpe J
Histopathology; 2018 Dec; 73(6):923-932. PubMed ID: 30168167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Novel prognostic histopathological grading system in oral squamous cell carcinoma based on tumour budding and cell nest size shows high interobserver and intraobserver concordance.
Boxberg M; Bollwein C; Jöhrens K; Kuhn PH; Haller B; Steiger K; Wolff KD; Kolk A; Jesinghaus M; Weichert W
J Clin Pathol; 2019 Apr; 72(4):285-294. PubMed ID: 30530818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Tumor budding in colorectal carcinoma: An institutional interobserver reliability and prognostic study of colorectal adenocarcinoma cases.
Hacking S; Angert M; Jin C; Kline M; Gupta N; Cho M; Thomas R; Lee L; Chavarria H; Nasim M
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2019 Dec; 43():151420. PubMed ID: 31731034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reproducibility and prognostic variability of grade and lamina propria invasion in stages Ta, T1 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.
Bol MG; Baak JP; Buhr-Wildhagen S; Kruse AJ; Kjellevold KH; Janssen EA; Mestad O; Øgreid P
J Urol; 2003 Apr; 169(4):1291-4. PubMed ID: 12629345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Inter-observer agreement among pathologists in grading the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.
Yamaguchi T; Mukai H; Akiyama F; Arihiro K; Masuda S; Kurosumi M; Kodama Y; Horii R; Tsuda H
Breast Cancer; 2018 Jan; 25(1):118-125. PubMed ID: 28856554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Nodal stage classification for breast carcinoma: improving interobserver reproducibility through standardized histologic criteria and image-based training.
Turner RR; Weaver DL; Cserni G; Lester SC; Hirsch K; Elashoff DA; Fitzgibbons PL; Viale G; Mazzarol G; Ibarra JA; Schnitt SJ; Giuliano AE
J Clin Oncol; 2008 Jan; 26(2):258-63. PubMed ID: 18182666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement.
Robbins P; Pinder S; de Klerk N; Dawkins H; Harvey J; Sterrett G; Ellis I; Elston C
Hum Pathol; 1995 Aug; 26(8):873-9. PubMed ID: 7635449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Poorly Differentiated Clusters Predict Colon Cancer Recurrence: An In-Depth Comparative Analysis of Invasive-Front Prognostic Markers.
Konishi T; Shimada Y; Lee LH; Cavalcanti MS; Hsu M; Smith JJ; Nash GM; Temple LK; Guillem JG; Paty PB; Garcia-Aguilar J; Vakiani E; Gonen M; Shia J; Weiser MR
Am J Surg Pathol; 2018 Jun; 42(6):705-714. PubMed ID: 29624511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Accuracy of grading of urothelial carcinoma on urine cytology: an analysis of interobserver and intraobserver agreement.
Reid MD; Osunkoya AO; Siddiqui MT; Looney SW
Int J Clin Exp Pathol; 2012; 5(9):882-91. PubMed ID: 23119105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Visual assessment of Ki67 using a 5-grade scale (Eye-5) is easy and practical to classify breast cancer subtypes with high reproducibility.
Hida AI; Bando K; Sugita A; Maeda T; Ueda N; Matsukage S; Nakanishi M; Kito K; Miyazaki T; Ohtsuki Y; Oshiro Y; Inoue H; Kawaguchi H; Yamashita N; Aogi K; Moriya T
J Clin Pathol; 2015 May; 68(5):356-61. PubMed ID: 25673730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma.
Frierson HF; Wolber RA; Berean KW; Franquemont DW; Gaffey MJ; Boyd JC; Wilbur DC
Am J Clin Pathol; 1995 Feb; 103(2):195-8. PubMed ID: 7856562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Interobserver variability in upfront dichotomous histopathological assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the DCISion study.
Dano H; Altinay S; Arnould L; Bletard N; Colpaert C; Dedeurwaerdere F; Dessauvagie B; Duwel V; Floris G; Fox S; Gerosa C; Jaffer S; Kurpershoek E; Lacroix-Triki M; Laka A; Lambein K; MacGrogan GM; Marchió C; Martinez DM; Nofech-Mozes S; Peeters D; Ravarino A; Reisenbichler E; Resetkova E; Sanati S; Schelfhout AM; Schelfhout V; Shaaban AM; Sinke R; Stanciu-Pop CM; Stobbe C; van Deurzen CHM; Van de Vijver K; Van Rompuy AS; Verschuere S; Vincent-Salomon A; Wen H; Bouzin C; Galant C; Van Bockstal MR
Mod Pathol; 2020 Mar; 33(3):354-366. PubMed ID: 31534203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
