166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37338046)
1. Rationality of FIGO 2018 IIIC restaging of cervical cancer according to local tumor size: A cohort study.
Duan H; Li H; Kang S; Zhao H; Chen B; Wang L; Li P; Wang Y; Wang W; Lang J; Liu P; Chen C
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2023 Aug; 102(8):1045-1052. PubMed ID: 37338046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Discussion on the rationality of FIGO 2018 stage IIIC for cervical cancer with oncological outcomes: a cohort study.
Li Z; Duan H; Guo J; Yang Y; Wang W; Hao M; Li W; Li P; Bin X; Lang J; Liu P; Chen C
Ann Transl Med; 2022 Jan; 10(2):122. PubMed ID: 35282078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Survival outcomes of 2018 FIGO stage IIIC versus stages IIIA and IIIB in cervical cancer: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Zhang Y; Wang C; Zhao Z; Cheng L; Xu S; Xie P; Xie L; Zhang S
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2024 Jun; 165(3):959-968. PubMed ID: 37950594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Treatment of FIGO 2018 stage IIIC cervical cancer with different local tumor factors.
Ye Y; Li Z; Kang S; Yang Y; Ling B; Wang L; Yao J; Li P; Wang X; Gong S; Fan H; Kong Y; Cao Y; Lang J; Liu P; Chen C
BMC Cancer; 2023 May; 23(1):421. PubMed ID: 37161372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparing survival outcomes for cervical cancer based on the 2014 and 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging systems.
Shin W; Ham TY; Park YR; Lim MC; Won YJ
Sci Rep; 2021 Mar; 11(1):6988. PubMed ID: 33772044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. [Outcomes and prognostic factors of distant metastasis in patients with advanced cervical squamous cell carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy].
Ma R; Zhang H; Zou L; Qu Y
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Feb; 50(2):125-30. PubMed ID: 25877610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Restaging and Survival Analysis of 4036 Ovarian Cancer Patients According to the 2013 FIGO Classification for Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancer.
Rosendahl M; Høgdall CK; Mosgaard BJ
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2016 May; 26(4):680-7. PubMed ID: 26937751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of the New FIGO Classification for Cervical Cancer on Patient Survival: A Retrospective Analysis of 265 Histologically Confirmed Cases with FIGO Stages IA to IIB.
de Gregorio A; Widschwendter P; Ebner F; Friedl TWP; Huober J; Janni W; de Gregorio N
Oncology; 2020; 98(2):91-97. PubMed ID: 31593942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Oncologic outcomes in the era of modern radiation therapy using FIGO 2018 staging system for cervical cancer.
Brodeur MN; Dejean R; Beauchemin MC; Samouëlian V; Cormier B; Bacha OM; Warkus T; Barkati M
Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Aug; 162(2):277-283. PubMed ID: 34059350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Impact of the new FIGO 2009 staging classification for vulvar cancer on prognosis and stage distribution.
Tabbaa ZM; Gonzalez J; Sznurkowski JJ; Weaver AL; Mariani A; Cliby WA
Gynecol Oncol; 2012 Oct; 127(1):147-52. PubMed ID: 22704951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. International Federation of gynecology and obstetrics staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: estimation of survival in patients with node-positive epithelial ovarian cancer.
Pereira A; Pérez-Medina T; Magrina JF; Magtibay PM; Rodríguez-Tapia A; Peregrin I; Mendizabal E; Ortiz-Quintana L
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2015 Jan; 25(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 25405578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Stage Migration in Cervical Cancer Using the FIGO 2018 Staging System: A Retrospective Survival Analysis Using a Single-Institution Patient Cohort.
Vengaloor Thomas T; Reddy KK; Gandhi S; Nittala MR; Abraham A; Robinson W; Ridgway M; Packianathan S; Vijayakumar S
Cureus; 2021 Nov; 13(11):e19289. PubMed ID: 34877225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Prognostic value of the 2018 FIGO staging system for cervical cancer.
Mohamud A; Høgdall C; Schnack T
Gynecol Oncol; 2022 Jun; 165(3):506-513. PubMed ID: 35346512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical and imaging findings in cervical cancer and their impact on FIGO and TNM staging - An analysis from the EMBRACE study.
Knoth J; Pötter R; Jürgenliemk-Schulz IM; Haie-Meder C; Fokdal L; Sturdza A; Hoskin P; Mahantshetty U; Segedin B; Bruheim K; Wiebe E; Rai B; Cooper R; van der Steen-Banasik E; van Limbergen E; Pieters BR; Sundset M; Tan LT; Nout RA; Tanderup K; Kirisits C; Nesvacil N; Lindegaard JC; Schmid MP
Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Oct; 159(1):136-141. PubMed ID: 32798000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
