Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:7705705rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0302592lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0030705lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0032246lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0444706lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0812425lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0033522lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0220901lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:issue1lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:dateCreated1995-5-8lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:abstractTextIn a prospective study of 465 patients with invasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix, the prognostic impact of flow cytometric parameters (ploidy level and fraction of S-phase cells) and clinical variables was evaluated. Median follow-up time was 57 (32-80) months. A total of 230 patients died of cervical cancer during follow-up. Ploidy level had no prognostic significance, neither when analyzed as diploid against nondiploid nor when utilizing different cutoff levels for DNA index (1.3, 1.5, and 1.7). The fraction of S-phase cells (SPF) could be evaluated in 91% of the diploid cases but in only 22% of nondiploid cases. SPF had no prognostic impact. In multivariate analysis, FIGO stage was the only independent prognostic factor (P < 0.001). There was no difference between squamous cell, adeno, and adenosquamous carcinomas. A radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy was performed in 123 cases in stage I-IIA. In this subgroup, tumor size (P = 0.001), infiltration into the parametria (P = 0.005), vessel invasion (P = 0.008), and metastasis to the common iliac nodes (P = 0.013) obtained independent statistical significance in multivariate analysis, while ploidy level had no significance. Neither DNA ploidy nor S-phase analyses should be used in treatment planning.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:monthAprlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:issn0090-8258lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorpubmed-author:PettersenE...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorpubmed-author:HagmarBBlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KaernJJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorpubmed-author:TropéC GCGlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KristensenG...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorpubmed-author:AbelerV MVMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:volume57lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:pagination79-85lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:7705705-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:year1995lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:articleTitleNo prognostic impact of flow-cytometric measured DNA ploidy and S-phase fraction in cancer of the uterine cervix: a prospective study of 465 patients.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:affiliationDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:7705705pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed