117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9103400)
1. The prognostic value of semiquantitative nuclear grading in endometrial carcinomas.
Hachisuga T; Kawarabayashi T; Iwasaka T; Sugimori H; Kamura T; Tsuneyoshi M
Gynecol Oncol; 1997 Apr; 65(1):115-20. PubMed ID: 9103400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The outcome of stage I-II clinically and surgically staged papillary serous and clear cell endometrial cancers when compared with endometrioid carcinoma.
Cirisano FD; Robboy SJ; Dodge RK; Bentley RC; Krigman HR; Synan IS; Soper JT; Clarke-Pearson DL
Gynecol Oncol; 2000 Apr; 77(1):55-65. PubMed ID: 10739691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of three histological grading systems in endometrial cancer.
Bilgin T; Ozuysal S; Ozan H
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2005 Jun; 272(1):23-5. PubMed ID: 15241614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The reproducibility of histological parameters employed in the novel binary grading systems of endometrial cancer.
Gemer O; Uriev L; Voldarsky M; Gdalevich M; Ben-Dor D; Barak F; Anteby EY; Lavie O
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2009 Mar; 35(3):247-51. PubMed ID: 18775628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Testing of two binary grading systems for FIGO stage III serous carcinoma of the ovary and peritoneum.
Seidman JD; Horkayne-Szakaly I; Cosin JA; Ryu HS; Haiba M; Boice CR; Yemelyanova AV
Gynecol Oncol; 2006 Nov; 103(2):703-8. PubMed ID: 16828848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Toward the development of a universal grading system for ovarian epithelial carcinoma. I. Prognostic significance of histopathologic features--problems involved in the architectural grading system.
Shimizu Y; Kamoi S; Amada S; Hasumi K; Akiyama F; Silverberg SG
Gynecol Oncol; 1998 Jul; 70(1):2-12. PubMed ID: 9698465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The reproducibility of a binary tumor grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, compared with FIGO system and nuclear grading.
Sagae S; Saito T; Satoh M; Ikeda T; Kimura S; Mori M; Sato N; Kudo R
Oncology; 2004; 67(5-6):344-50. PubMed ID: 15713989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Minor serous and clear cell components adversely affect prognosis in ''mixed-type'' endometrial carcinomas: a clinicopathologic study of 36 stage-I cases.
Quddus MR; Sung CJ; Zhang C; Lawrence WD
Reprod Sci; 2010 Jul; 17(7):673-8. PubMed ID: 20393071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Role of DNA ploidy analysis in endometrial adenocarcinoma.
Jhala DN; Atkinson BF; Balsara GR; Hernandez E; Jhala NC
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2001 Oct; 5(5):267-73. PubMed ID: 11598854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Loss of nuclear p16 protein expression is not associated with promoter methylation but defines a subgroup of aggressive endometrial carcinomas with poor prognosis.
Salvesen HB; Das S; Akslen LA
Clin Cancer Res; 2000 Jan; 6(1):153-9. PubMed ID: 10656444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Fuhrman grading is not appropriate for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma.
Delahunt B; Sika-Paotonu D; Bethwaite PB; McCredie MR; Martignoni G; Eble JN; Jordan TW
Am J Surg Pathol; 2007 Jun; 31(6):957-60. PubMed ID: 17527087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Validation of the histologic grading for ovarian clear cell adenocarcinoma: a retrospective multi-institutional study by the Japan Clear Cell Carcinoma Study Group.
Yamamoto S; Kasajima A; Takano M; Yaegashi N; Fujiwara H; Kuzuya K; Kigawa J; Tsuda H; Kurachi H; Kikuchi Y; Sugiyama T; Tsuda H; Moriya T
Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2011 Mar; 30(2):129-38. PubMed ID: 21293288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Markers of proliferative activity are predictors of patient outcome for low-grade endometrioid adenocarcinoma but not papillary serous carcinoma of endometrium.
Al Kushi A; Lim P; Aquino-Parsons C; Gilks CB
Mod Pathol; 2002 Apr; 15(4):365-71. PubMed ID: 11950909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Natural killer cell activity in stage I endometrial carcinoma: correlation with nuclear grading, myometrial invasion, and immunoreactivity of proliferating cell nuclear antigen.
Garzetti GG; Ciavattini A; Goteri G; Tranquilli AL; Muzzioli M; Fabris N; De Nictolis M; Romanini C
Gynecol Oncol; 1994 Oct; 55(1):111-4. PubMed ID: 7525425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Papillary serous and clear cell carcinoma limited to endometrial curettings in FIGO stage 1a and 1b endometrial adenocarcinoma: treatment implications.
Aquino-Parsons C; Lim P; Wong F; Mildenberger M
Gynecol Oncol; 1998 Oct; 71(1):83-6. PubMed ID: 9784324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Morphologic prognostic criteria in endometrial cancer with special reference to nuclear grading].
Schneider ML
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd; 1986 May; 46(5):267-77. PubMed ID: 3721157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Precursors of endometrial clear cell carcinoma.
Fadare O; Liang SX; Ulukus EC; Chambers SK; Zheng W
Am J Surg Pathol; 2006 Dec; 30(12):1519-30. PubMed ID: 17122507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Nucleolar grade but not Fuhrman grade is applicable to papillary renal cell carcinoma.
Sika-Paotonu D; Bethwaite PB; McCredie MR; William Jordan T; Delahunt B
Am J Surg Pathol; 2006 Sep; 30(9):1091-6. PubMed ID: 16931953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Tumor cell type can be reproducibly diagnosed and is of independent prognostic significance in patients with maximally debulked ovarian carcinoma.
Gilks CB; Ionescu DN; Kalloger SE; Köbel M; Irving J; Clarke B; Santos J; Le N; Moravan V; Swenerton K;
Hum Pathol; 2008 Aug; 39(8):1239-51. PubMed ID: 18602670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
