Literature DB >> 8005742

Evaluation and comparison of histopathologic grading systems of epithelial carcinoma of the uterine cervix: Gynecologic Oncology Group studies.

R J Stock1, R Zaino, B N Bundy, F B Askin, J Woodward, B Fetter, J A Paulson, P J DiSaia, F B Stehman.   

Abstract

The subjects of this study are 445 patients with advanced cervical cancer treated by standardized radiation therapy. Upon entry into one of two Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) protocols, original pathologic diagnoses and histologic tumor descriptions for each patient were compared with separate evaluations made by a consensus opinion of two GOG pathologists. A review diagnosis using grade, cell type, and the Stendahl scoring system was then made by the first author (R.J.S.) without knowledge of the prior diagnoses. Of the original pathologists' diagnoses, 21% did not include grade or cell type. There was little agreement among the different pathologists as to the use of either specific grade or cell type. Histologic grade, irrespective of the pathologists making the diagnosis, had no correlation to prognosis. The Reagan and Wentz large-cell keratinizing (LCK) cell type, when applied by the author to tumors with any form of squamous keratinization present, identified a group of patients with a poorer prognosis, although not independently of other prognostic factors. The Stendahl scoring system identified a number of patients with both a poorer and better prognosis. This was statistically significant and independent of other risk factors. A major limitation, however, was the number of patients evaluable because of inadequate biopsy material in 23.6% of the study group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8005742     DOI: 10.1097/00004347-199404000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Pathol        ISSN: 0277-1691            Impact factor:   2.762


  6 in total

1.  [S3 guidelines on diagnostics and treatment of cervical cancer: Demands on pathology].

Authors:  L-C Horn; M W Beckmann; M Follmann; M C Koch; P Mallmann; S Marnitz; D Schmidt
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 2.  [Grading of gynecological tumors : Current aspects].

Authors:  L-C Horn; D Mayr; C E Brambs; J Einenkel; I Sändig; K Schierle
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 1.011

3.  Cervical cancer evaluated with integrated 18F-FDG PET/MR.

Authors:  Jing Gong; Nan Wang; Lihua Bian; Min Wang; Mingxia Ye; Na Wen; Meng Fu; Wensheng Fan; Yuanguang Meng
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 2.967

4.  Indicators of survival and prognostic factors in women treated for cervical cancer at a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Nisreen Anfinan; Khalid Sait
Journal:  Ann Saudi Med       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 1.526

Review 5.  Cervical Cancers: Varieties and the Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology.

Authors:  Rasika Gadkari; R Ravi; Jasvinder Kaur Bhatia
Journal:  Cytojournal       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 2.345

6.  Association of tumor differentiation grade and survival of women with squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix.

Authors:  Koji Matsuo; Rachel S Mandelbaum; Hiroko Machida; Sanjay Purushotham; Brendan H Grubbs; Lynda D Roman; Jason D Wright
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.401

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.