Problems of endometrial histology interpretation

References

• Chambers J T, Chambers S K. Endometrial sampling: When? Where? Why? With what?. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1992; 35: 28–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larson D M, Johnson K K, Broste S K, Krawisz B R, Kresl J J. Comparison of dilatation and curettage and office endometrial biopsy in predicting final histopathologic grade in endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86: 38–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferenczy A, Gelfand M. The biologic significance of cytologic atypia in progestogen treated endometrial hyperplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160: 126–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang S J, Amparo E G, Fu Y S. Endometrial hyperplasia: histologic classification and behavior. Surg Pathol 1988; 1: 215–29
   Google Scholar
• Kurman R J, Kaminski P F, Norris H J. The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long term study of ‘untreated’ hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer 1985; 59: 403–12
   Google Scholar
• Scully R E, Bonfiglio T A, Kurman R J, Silverberg S G, Wilkinson E J. International Histological Classifications and Typing of Female Genital Tract Tumours. Springer-Verlag, New York 1994
   Google Scholar
• Gusberg S B, Kaplan A L. Precursors of corpus cancer: adenomatous hyperplasia as stage 0 carcinoma of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1963; 87: 662–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendall B S, Ronnet B M, Isacson C, et al. Reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia and well-differentiated carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 1012–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergeron C, Nogales F F, Masseroli M, et al. A multicentric European study testing the reproducibility of the WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasia with a proposal of a simplified working classification for biopsy and curettage specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 1999; 23: 1102–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janicek M F, Rosenheim N B. Invasive endometrial cancer in uteri resected for atypical endometrial hyperplasia. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 52: 373–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mutter G L, Baak J PA, Crum C P, Richart R, Ferenczy A, Faquin W C. Endometrial precancer diagnosis by histopathology, clonal analysis, and computerized morphometry. J Pathol 2000; 190: 462–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferenczy A, Bergeron C. Endometrial hyperplasias. Advances in Gynaecological Pathology, D Lowe, H Fox. Churchill Livingstone, London 1992; 7–34
   Google Scholar
• Mazur M T, Kurman R J. Endometrial hyperplasia and epithelial cytoplasmic change. Diagnosis of Endometrial Biopsies and Curettings. A Practical Approach. Springer-Verlag, New York 1995; 160–83
   Google Scholar
• Skov B G, Broholm H, Engel U, et al. Comparison of the reproducibility of the WHO classifications of 1975 and 1994 of endometrial hyperplasia. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997; 16: 33–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurman R J, Norris H J. Evaluation of criteria for distinguishing atypical endometrial hyperplasia from well differentiated endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 1982; 49: 2547–59
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longacre T A, Chung M H, Jensen D N, Hendrickson M R. Proposed criteria for the diagnosis of well-differentiated endometrial carcinoma. A diagnostic test for myoinvasion. Am J Surg Pathol 1995; 19: 371–406
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavassoli F, Kraus F T. Endometrial lesions in uteri resected for atypical endometrial hyperplasia. Am J Clin Pathol 1978; 70: 770–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee K R, Scully R E. Complex endometrial hyperplasia and carcinoma in adolescents and young women 15 to 20 years of age. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1989; 8: 201–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randall T C, Kurman R J. Progestin treatment of atypical hyperplasia and well differentiated carcinoma of the endometrium in women under age 40. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 434–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grady D, Gebretsadik T, Kerlikowske K, Ernster V, Petitti D. Hormone replacement therapy and endometrial cancer risk: a meta–analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85: 304–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cushing K L, Weiss N S, Voigt L F, McKnight B, Beresford S A. Risk of endometrial cancer in relation to use of low-dose, unopposed estrogens. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91: 35–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korhonen M O, Symons J P, Hyde B M, Rowan J P, Wilborn W H. Histologic classification and pathologic findings for endometrial biopsy specimens obtained from 2964 perimenopausal and postmenopausal women undergoing screening for continuous hormones as replacement therapy (Chart 2 Study). Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176: 377–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products. Points to consider on hormone replacement therapy. CPMP, London 13 November, 1997
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration HRT Working Group. Guidance for clinical evaluation of combination estrogen–progestin-containing drug products used for hormone replacement therapy of postmenopausal women. FDA, Washington, DC 1995
   Google Scholar
• Beresford S AA, Weiss N S, Voigt L F, McKnight B. Risk of endometrial cancer in relation to use of oestrogen combined with cyclic progestogen therapy in postmenopausal women. Lancet 1997; 349: 458–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comerci J T, Fields A, Runowicz C D, Golberg G L. Continuous low-dose combined hormone replacement therapy and the risk of endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 1997; 64: 425–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar