The Prognostic Information of DNA Ploidy and S-PHASE Fraction May Vary with Histologic Grade in Endometrial Carcinoma

References

• Carey M S, Connell G J O, Johanson C R, et al. Good outcome associated with a standarized treatment protocol using selective postoperative radiation in patients with clinical stage I adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 57: 138–44
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Poulsen H K. The Danish endometrial cancer study (DEMCA). Acta Oncol 1989; 28: 589–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Annual report on the results of treatment in gynaecological cancer, FIGO. Statements of results obtained in patients treated in 1987 to 1989, inclusive actuarial survival up to 1993, F Pettersson, W T Creasman, J H Shepherd, S Pecorelli. Radiumhemmet, Stockholm 1994
   Google Scholar
• Morrow C P, Bundy B N, Kurtman R J, et al. Relationship between surgical‐pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1991; 40: 55–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abeler V M, Kjörstad K E, Berle E. Carcinoma of the endometrium in Norway a histopathological and prognostic survey of a total population. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1992; 2: 9–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alm P, Gudmundsson R, Mårtensson R, Anderson H, Hor‐vath G, Högberg T. Identification of small areas of solid growth has a strong prognostic impact in differentiated endometrial carcinomas. A histopathologic and morphometric study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1995; 5: 87–93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iversen O E. Flow cytometric deoxyribonucleic acid index: A prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986; 155: 770–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindahl B, Alm P, Fernö M, et al. Prognostic value of flow cytometric DNA measurements in stage 1 ‐II endometrial carcinoma: Correlation with steroid receptor concentration, tumor myometrial invasion and degree of differentiation. Anticancer Res 1987; 7: 791–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geisinger K R, Homesley H O, Morgan T M, Kute T E, Marshal R B. Endometrial adenocarcinoma. A multiparameter clinicopathologic analysis including DNA profile and sex steroid hormone receptors. Cancer 1986; 58: 1518–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stendahl U, Strong P, Wagenius G, Bergstrom R, Tribukait B. Prognostic significance of proliferation in endometrial adenocarcinoma: A multivariate analysis of clinical and flow cytometric variables. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1991; 10: 271–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friberg L G, Norén H, Delle U. Prognostic value of DNA ploidy and S‐phase fraction in endometrial cancer stage I and II: a prospective 5–year survival study. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 53: 64–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Susini T, Rapi S, Savino L, Boddi V, Berti P, Massi G. Prognostic value of flow cytometric deoxyribonucleic acid index in endometrial carcinoma: comparison with other clinical‐pathologic parameters. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170: 527–34
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagenius G, Bergström R, Strang P, et al. Prognostic significance of flowcytometric and clinical variables in endometrial adenocarcinoma stages I and II. Anticancer Res 1992; 12: 725–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minckwitz G, Kuhn W, Kaufmann M, et al. Prognostic importance of DNA‐ploidy and S‐phase fraction in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1994; 4: 250–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagenius G, Strang P, Boman K, Tribukait B, Stendahl U. Residual myometrial invasion after intracavitary irradiation of endometrial adenocarcinoma stage I and II. In Vivo 1988; 2: 243–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stendahl W, Wagenius G, Strang P, Tribukait B. Flowcytometry in invasive endometrial carcinoma (correlation's between DNA content S‐phase‐range and clinical parameters) In Vivo 1988; 2: 123–8
   Google Scholar
• Hedley D W, Clark G M, Cornelisse C J, Killander D, Kutte T, Merkel D. Consensus review of the clinical utility of DNA cytometry in carcinoma of the breast. Cytometry 1993; 14: 482–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moberger B, Auer G, Forslund G, Moberger G. The prognostic significance of DNA measurements in endometrial carcinoma. Cytometry 1984; 5: 430–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sorbe B, Risberg B, Frankendahl B. DNA ploidy, morphometry, and nuclear grade as prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1990; 38: 22–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg P, Wingren S, Simonsen E, Stål O, Risberg B, Nordenskjöld B. Flow cytometric measurements of DNA index and S‐phase on paraffin‐embedded early stage endometrial cancer: An important prognostic indicator. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35: 50–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Britton L C, Wilson T O, Gaffey T A, et al. Flow cytometric DNA‐analysis of stage I endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 34: 317–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konski A A, Myles J L, Sawyer T. Flow cytometric DNA content analyses of paraffin block embedded endometrial carcinomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991; 21: 1033–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nowbury R, Schuerch C, Goodspeed N, Fanning J, Glidewell O, Evans M. DNA content as a prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 6: 51–7
   Google Scholar
• Coleman R L, Schink J C, Miller D S, et al. DNA flow cytometric analysis of clinical stage I endometrial carcinomas with lymph node metastases. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 50: 20–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goodman A, Bell D, Rice L. DNA ploidy status: Its impact on early‐stage endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 51: 355–61
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ambros R, Kurman R. Identification of patients with stage I uterine endometrioid adenocdrcinoma of high‐rish of recurrence by DNA ploidy, myometrial invasion, and vascular invasion. Gynecol Oncol 1992; 45: 235–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shanket T V, Kallioniemi O P, Koslowski J M, et al. Consensus review of the clinical utility of DNA content cytometry in prostate cancer. Cytometry 1993; 14: 497–500
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Classification and staging of malignant tumors in the female pelvis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1971; 50: 1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyman J. The so‐called Stockholm method and the results of treatment of uterine cancer at Radiumhemmet. Acta Radiol 1935; 16: 129–48
   Google Scholar
• Poulsen H E, Taylor C W. Histological typing of female genital tract tumors. International histological classification of tumors. World Health Organization, Geneva 1975, No 13
   Google Scholar
• Hedley B W, Friedlander M I, Taylor I W, et al. Method for analysis of cellular DNA content of paraffin‐embedded pathological material using flow cytometry. J Histochem Cytochem 1983; 31: 1333–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutte B, Reynders M, Bosman F, Bliijham G. Flow cytometric determination of ploidy level in nuclei isolated from paraffin‐embedded tissue. Cytometry 1985; 6: 26–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hiddemann W, Schumann J, Androot M, et al. Convention of nomenclature for DNA. Cytometry 1988; 5: 44–6
   Google Scholar
• Baldetorp B, Dalberg M, Holst U, Lindgren K. Statistical evaluation of cell kinetic data form DNA flowcytometry (FCM) by algorithm. Cytometry 1989; 10: 695–705
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baisch H, Göhde W, Linden W A. Analysis of PCP‐data of determine the fraction of cells in the various phase of cell cycle. Radiat Environ Biophys 1975; 12: 31–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox D R P. Regression model and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 1972; 34: 187–202
   Google Scholar
• Lindahl B, Alm P, Killander D, Långström E, Trope C. Flow cytometric DNA analysis of normal and carcinous human endometrial and cytological‐histopathologic correlation. Anti‐cancer Res 1987; 7: 781–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar