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 *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33587753)

  • 21. Locoregional spread and survival of stage IIA1 versus stage IIA2 cervical cancer.
    Hongladaromp W; Tantipalakorn C; Charoenkwan K; Srisomboon J
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2014; 15(2):887-90. PubMed ID: 24568513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A nomogram predicting the risks of distant metastasis following postoperative radiotherapy for uterine cervical carcinoma: a Korean radiation oncology group study (KROG 12-08).
    Je HU; Han S; Kim YS; Nam JH; Kim HJ; Kim JW; Park W; Bae DS; Kim JH; Shin SJ; Kim J; Lee KH; Yoon MS; Kim SM; Kim JY; Yoon WS; Lee NW; Choi JH; Park SY; Kim JY
    Radiother Oncol; 2014 Jun; 111(3):437-41. PubMed ID: 24909094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Prognostic Assessment of Cervical Cancer Patients by Clinical Staging and Surgical-Pathological Factor: A Support Vector Machine-Based Approach.
    Xie L; Chu R; Wang K; Zhang X; Li J; Zhao Z; Yao S; Wang Z; Dong T; Yang X; Su X; Qiao X; Song K; Kong B
    Front Oncol; 2020; 10():1353. PubMed ID: 32850433
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Para-aortic lymph node involvement revisited in the light of the revised 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer.
    Ayhan A; Aslan K; Öz M; Tohma YA; Kuşçu E; Meydanli MM
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2019 Sep; 300(3):675-682. PubMed ID: 31263988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Nomogram Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with FIGO II to III Squamous Cell Cervical Carcinoma Under Radical Radiotherapy: A Retrospective Analysis Based on 2018 FIGO Staging.
    Zang L; Chen Q; Zhang X; Zhong X; Chen J; Fang Y; Lin A; Wang M
    Cancer Manag Res; 2021; 13():9391-9400. PubMed ID: 35002316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Horizontal tumor extent (HZTE) has limited prognostic significance in 2018 FIGO stage I endocervical adenocarcinoma (ECA): a retrospective study of 416 cases.
    Stolnicu S; Hoang L; Almadani N; De Brot L; Bovolim G; Baiocchi G; Brito MJ; Karpathiou G; Ieni A; Fernandez EG; Kyiokawa T; Dundr P; Parra-Herran C; Lérias S; Felix A; Roma A; Pesci A; Oliva E; Soslow RA; Abu-Rustum NR; Park KJ
    J Cancer Res Clin Oncol; 2022 Mar; 148(3):577-586. PubMed ID: 34767079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Prognostic factors in FIGO stage IB cervical cancer without lymph node metastasis and the role of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical hysterectomy.
    Ayhan A; Al RA; Baykal C; Demirtas E; Ayhan A; Yüce K
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2004; 14(2):286-92. PubMed ID: 15086728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Interobserver agreement and prognostic impact for MRI-based 2018 FIGO staging parameters in uterine cervical cancer.
    Wagner-Larsen KS; Lura N; Salvesen Ø; Halle MK; Forsse D; Trovik J; Smit N; Krakstad C; Haldorsen IS
    Eur Radiol; 2022 Sep; 32(9):6444-6455. PubMed ID: 35332408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Validation of the FIGO 2018 staging system of cervical cancer: Retrospective analysis of FIGO 2009 stage IB1 cervical cancer with tumor under 2 cm.
    Takahashi M; Sakai K; Iwasa N; Wada M; Hino M; Kurahashi T; Ueno M; Nakagawa H
    J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2021 May; 47(5):1871-1877. PubMed ID: 33611822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Parametrial involvement and decreased survival of women with FIGO stage IIIC1 cervical cancer.
    Chang H; Wang M; Liu Y; Wu Y
    J Gynecol Oncol; 2023 Jul; 34(4):e46. PubMed ID: 36929577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Prognostic value of the 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer patients with surgical risk factors.
    Yan DD; Tang Q; Chen JH; Tu YQ; Lv XJ
    Cancer Manag Res; 2019; 11():5473-5480. PubMed ID: 31354353
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Radical hysterectomy for FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer: clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic evaluation.
    Kasamatsu T; Onda T; Sawada M; Kato T; Ikeda S
    Gynecol Oncol; 2009 Jul; 114(1):69-74. PubMed ID: 19398126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of clinical outcomes of adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma in uterine cervical cancer patients receiving surgical resection followed by radiotherapy: a multicenter retrospective study (KROG 13-10).
    Noh JM; Park W; Kim YS; Kim JY; Kim HJ; Kim J; Kim JH; Yoon MS; Choi JH; Yoon WS; Kim JY; Huh SJ
    Gynecol Oncol; 2014 Mar; 132(3):618-23. PubMed ID: 24486605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Early cervical cancer and parametrial involvement: is it significant?
    Steed H; Capstick V; Schepansky A; Honore L; Hiltz M; Faught W
    Gynecol Oncol; 2006 Oct; 103(1):53-7. PubMed ID: 16516279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Development and validation of a surgical-pathologic staging and scoring system for cervical cancer.
    Li S; Li X; Zhang Y; Zhou H; Tang F; Jia Y; Hu T; Sun H; Yang R; Chen Y; Cheng X; Lv W; Wu L; Zhou J; Wang S; Huang K; Wang L; Yao Y; Yang Q; Yang X; Zhang Q; Han X; Lin Z; Xing H; Qu P; Cai H; Song X; Tian X; Shen J; Xi L; Li K; Deng D; Wang H; Wang C; Wu M; Zhu T; Chen G; Gao Q; Wang S; Hu J; Kong B; Xie X; Ma D
    Oncotarget; 2016 Apr; 7(15):21054-63. PubMed ID: 27014971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Postoperative nomogram predicting risk of recurrence after radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer.
    Kim MK; Jo H; Kong HJ; Kim HC; Kim JW; Kim YM; Song YS; Kang SB; Mok JE; Lee HP
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2010 Dec; 20(9):1581-6. PubMed ID: 21370600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Prognostic significance of solitary lymph node metastasis in patients with stages IA2 to IIA cervical carcinoma.
    Dai YF; Xu M; Zhong LY; Xie XY; Liu ZD; Yan MX; Yi H; Lin DM
    J Int Med Res; 2018 Oct; 46(10):4082-4091. PubMed ID: 29963935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Prognostic factors in definitive radiotherapy of uterine cervical cancer.
    Yalman D; Aras AB; Ozkök S; Duransoy A; Celik OK; Ozsaran Z; Haydaroğlu A
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2003; 24(3-4):309-14. PubMed ID: 12807246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The tumor-stroma ratio is an independent predictor of survival in patients with 2018 FIGO stage IIIC squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix following primary radical surgery.
    Zong L; Zhang Q; Kong Y; Yang F; Zhou Y; Yu S; Wu M; Chen J; Zhang Y; Xiang Y
    Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Mar; 156(3):676-681. PubMed ID: 31882242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.