Literature DB >> 5558978

The staging of cervical cancer: inevitable discrepancies between clinical staging and pathologic findinges.

J R Van Nagell, J W Roddick, D M Lowin.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  1971        PMID： 5558978     DOI： 10.1016/0002-9378(71)90551-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN： 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


× No keyword cloud information.
  16 in total

1.  Accuracy of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of lymph node involvement in cervix carcinoma.

Authors:  Massimo Bellomi; Guido Bonomo; Fabio Landoni; Gaetano Villa; Maria E Leon; Luca Bocciolone; Angelo Maggioni; Giuseppe Viale
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-07-06       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Tumor size and lymph node status determined by imaging are reliable factors for predicting advanced cervical cancer prognosis.

Authors:  Min Sun Kyung; Hong Bae Kim; Jung Yeob Seoung; In Young Choi; Young Soo Joo; Me Yeon Lee; Jung Bae Kang; Young Han Park
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 2.967

3.  Ultra-early predictive assay for treatment failure using functional magnetic resonance imaging and clinical prognostic parameters in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Nina A Mayr; William T C Yuh; David Jajoura; Jian Z Wang; Simon S Lo; Joseph F Montebello; Kyle Porter; Dongqing Zhang; D Scott McMeekin; John M Buatti
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Validation of optimal DCE-MRI perfusion threshold to classify at-risk tumor imaging voxels in heterogeneous cervical cancer for outcome prediction.

Authors:  Zhibin Huang; Kevin A Yuh; Simon S Lo; John C Grecula; Steffen Sammet; Christina L Sammet; Guang Jia; Michael V Knopp; Qiang Wu; Norman J Beauchamp; William T C Yuh; Roy Wang; Nina A Mayr
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 2.546

5.  Translating response during therapy into ultimate treatment outcome: a personalized 4-dimensional MRI tumor volumetric regression approach in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Nina A Mayr; Jian Z Wang; Simon S Lo; Dongqing Zhang; John C Grecula; Lanchun Lu; Joseph F Montebello; Jeffrey M Fowler; William T C Yuh
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Optimization of MR imaging for pretreatment evaluation of patients with endometrial and cervical cancer.

Authors:  Gaiane M Rauch; Harmeet Kaur; Haesun Choi; Randy D Ernst; Ann H Klopp; Piyaporn Boonsirikamchai; Shannon N Westin; Leonardo P Marcal
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.333

7.  Value of pelvic examination and imaging modality for the evaluation of tumor size in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Yoo-Kyung Lee; Seung-Su Han; Jae Weon Kim; Noh-Hyun Park; Yong-Sang Song; Soon-Beom Kang
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-06-20       Impact factor: 4.401

8.  Comparison of retrospective PET and MRI-DWI (PET/MRI-DWI) image fusion with PET/CT and MRI-DWI in detection of cervical and endometrial cancer lymph node metastases.

Authors:  Alessandro Stecco; Francesco Buemi; Alessia Cassarà; Roberta Matheoud; Gian Mauro Sacchetti; Alberto Arnulfo; Marco Brambilla; Alessandro Carriero
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  Imaging of endometrial and cervical cancer.

Authors:  Shilpa Patel; Sidath H Liyanage; Anju Sahdev; Andrea G Rockall; Rodney H Reznek
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2010-09-28

Review 10.  Implications of the new FIGO staging and the role of imaging in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Aki Kido; Yuji Nakamoto
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 3.629
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.