195 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31744640)
1. The variable impact of positive lymph nodes in cervical cancer: Implications of the new FIGO staging system.
McComas KN; Torgeson AM; Ager BJ; Hellekson C; Burt LM; Maurer KA; Werner TL; Gaffney DK
Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Jan; 156(1):85-92. PubMed ID: 31744640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. The prognostic significance of aortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: Potential implications for selective aortic lymph node assessment.
Cosgrove CM; Cohn DE; Rhoades J; Felix AS
Gynecol Oncol; 2019 Jun; 153(3):505-510. PubMed ID: 30935714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Significance of tumor size and number of positive nodes in patients with FIGO 2018 stage IIIC1 cervical cancer.
Maeda M; Mabuchi S; Sakata M; Deguchi S; Kakubari R; Matsuzaki S; Hisa T; Kamiura S
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2024 Feb; 54(2):146-152. PubMed ID: 37935434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in stage IIIC endometrial cancer: A single-institute study.
Kikuchi A; Yanase T; Sasagawa M; Honma S
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2017 May; 37(4):510-513. PubMed ID: 28421906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Validation of the 2018 FIGO cervical cancer staging system.
Matsuo K; Machida H; Mandelbaum RS; Konishi I; Mikami M
Gynecol Oncol; 2019 Jan; 152(1):87-93. PubMed ID: 30389105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Validation of the 2018 FIGO Staging System for Predicting the Prognosis of Patients With Stage IIIC Cervical Cancer.
Long X; He M; Yang L; Zou D; Wang D; Chen Y; Zhou Q
Clin Med Insights Oncol; 2023; 17():11795549221146652. PubMed ID: 36726607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. A Risk Stratification for Patients with Cervical Cancer in Stage IIIC1 of the 2018 FIGO Staging System.
Liu X; Wang W; Hu K; Zhang F; Hou X; Yan J; Meng Q; Zhou Z; Miao Z; Guan H; Ma J; Shen J; Zhen H; Wang W
Sci Rep; 2020 Jan; 10(1):362. PubMed ID: 31941966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Significance of para-aortic lymph node evaluation in patients with FIGO IIIC1 cervical cancer.
Cho WK; Kim YJ; Kim H; Kim YS; Park W
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2020 Sep; 50(10):1150-1156. PubMed ID: 32577748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Prognostic Significance of Nodal Location and Ratio in Stage IIIC Endometrial Carcinoma Among a Multi-Institutional Academic Collaboration.
Mayadev J; Elshaikh MA; Christie A; Nagel C; Kennedy V; Khan N; Lea J; Ghanem A; Miller D; Xie XJ; Folkert M; Albuquerque K
Am J Clin Oncol; 2018 Dec; 41(12):1220-1224. PubMed ID: 29683799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. FIGO Classification 2018: Validation Study in Patients With Locally Advanced Cervix Cancer Treated With Chemoradiation.
Raut A; Chopra S; Mittal P; Patil G; Mahantshetty U; Gurram L; Swamidas J; Ghosh J; Gulia S; Popat P; Deodhar K; Maheshwari A; Gupta S
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2020 Dec; 108(5):1248-1256. PubMed ID: 32681859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Significance of the absolute number and ratio of metastatic lymph nodes in predicting postoperative survival for the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IA2 to IIA cervical cancer.
Chen Y; Zhang L; Tian J; Fu X; Ren X; Hao Q
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2013 Jan; 23(1):157-63. PubMed ID: 23221732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. The Utility of PET/CT Metabolic Parameters Measured Based on Fixed Percentage Threshold of SUVmax and Adaptive Iterative Algorithm in the New Revised FIGO Staging System for Stage III Cervical Cancer.
Zhang Y; Hu Y; Zhao S; Cui C
Front Med (Lausanne); 2021; 8():680072. PubMed ID: 34395472
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. A multicenter analysis of adjuvant therapy after surgery for stage IIIC endometrial adenocarcinoma: A Korean Radiation Oncology Group study (KROG 13-17).
Yoon MS; Park W; Huh SJ; Kim HJ; Kim YS; Kim YB; Kim JY; Lee JH; Kim HJ; Cha J; Kim JH; Kim J; Yoon WS; Choi JH; Chun M; Choi Y; Chang SK; Lee KK; Kim M
Gynecol Oncol; 2015 Sep; 138(3):519-25. PubMed ID: 26115977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in stage I a2- II a2 cervical cancer: a matched cohort study].
Wang W; Shang C; Huang J; Chen S; Shen H; Yao S
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Dec; 50(12):894-901. PubMed ID: 26887872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [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]
[Next] [New Search]
