Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 241

1.

Distinction between endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinoma: an immunohistochemical study.

Castrillon DH, Lee KR, Nucci MR.

Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2002 Jan;21(1):4-10.

PMID:
11781516
3.

Immunohistochemical staining in the distinction between primary endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinomas: another viewpoint.

Kamoi S, AlJuboury MI, Akin MR, Silverberg SG.

Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2002 Jul;21(3):217-23.

PMID:
12068166
4.

Intestinal-type cervical adenocarcinoma in situ and adenocarcinoma exhibit a partial enteric immunophenotype with consistent expression of CDX2.

McCluggage WG, Shah R, Connolly LE, McBride HA.

Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2008 Jan;27(1):92-100.

PMID:
18156982
5.
6.

Distinguishing between primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas: is a 2-marker (Vim/CEA) panel enough?

Liao CL, Hsu JD, Lee MY, Kok LF, Li YJ, Wang PH, Yao CC, Han CP.

Virchows Arch. 2010 Apr;456(4):377-86. doi: 10.1007/s00428-010-0892-x. Epub 2010 Mar 11.

PMID:
20221633
7.

Five commonly used markers (p53, TTF1, CK7, CK20, and CK34betaE12) are of no use in distinguishing between primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray extension study.

Han CP, Kok LF, Lee MY, Wu TS, Ruan A, Cheng YW, Wang PH, Koo CL, Tyan YS.

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Feb;281(2):317-23. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-1115-z. Epub 2009 May 15.

PMID:
19444461
8.

Adding the p16(INK4a) marker to the traditional 3-marker (ER/Vim/CEA) panel engenders no supplemental benefit in distinguishing between primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study.

Han CP, Lee MY, Kok LF, Ruan A, Wu TS, Cheng YW, Tyan YS, Lin CY.

Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2009 Sep;28(5):489-96. doi: 10.1097/PGP.0b013e31819e8ab4.

PMID:
19696622
9.
11.

Ancillary p16(INK4a) adds no meaningful value to the performance of ER/PR/Vim/CEA panel in distinguishing between primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study.

Yao CC, Kok LF, Lee MY, Wang PH, Wu TS, Tyan YS, Cheng YW, Kung MF, Han CP.

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Sep;280(3):405-13. doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0859-1. Epub 2009 Jan 20.

PMID:
19153755
12.

A reappraisal of three-marker (ER/Vim/CEA), four-marker (ER/Vim/CEA/PR), and five-marker (ER/Vim/CEA/PR/p16INK4a) panels in the diagnostic distinction between primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study.

Han CP, Lee MY, Kok LF, Wu TS, Cheng YW, Wang PH, Yue CH, Tyan YS.

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 May;281(5):845-50. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-1151-8. Epub 2009 Jul 15.

PMID:
19847454
13.

Cytokeratins 7 and 20 in primary and secondary mucinous tumors of the ovary: analysis of coordinate immunohistochemical expression profiles and staining distribution in 179 cases.

Vang R, Gown AM, Barry TS, Wheeler DT, Yemelyanova A, Seidman JD, Ronnett BM.

Am J Surg Pathol. 2006 Sep;30(9):1130-9.

PMID:
16931958
14.

Immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis between primary and secondary intestinal adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder.

Raspollini MR, Nesi G, Baroni G, Girardi LR, Taddei GL.

Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2005 Dec;13(4):358-62.

PMID:
16280666
17.

[Value of ER, VIM, CEA and p16 detection in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas].

Hu WW, Tao JH, Li GM, Xu X, Yang XM.

Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2010 Mar;30(3):526-8, 531. Chinese.

18.

p16 immunoreactivity may assist in the distinction between endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinoma.

McCluggage WG, Jenkins D.

Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003 Jul;22(3):231-5.

PMID:
12819388
19.

True cytokeratin 8/18 immunohistochemistry is of no use in distinguishing between primary endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study.

Hsu JD, Yao CC, Lee MY, Kok LF, Wang PH, Tyan YS, Han CP.

Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2010 May;29(3):282-9. doi: 10.1097/PGP.0b013e3181c043bc.

PMID:
20407331
20.

Value of a panel of antibodies to identify the primary origin of adenocarcinomas presenting as bladder carcinoma.

Torenbeek R, Lagendijk JH, Van Diest PJ, Bril H, van de Molengraft FJ, Meijer CJ.

Histopathology. 1998 Jan;32(1):20-7.

PMID:
9522212
Items per page

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk