Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
238
pubmed:dateCreated
1994-5-12
pubmed:abstractText
Histopathological grading according to Scarff Bloom Richardson can provide powerful prognostic information. However one criticism of this system is that 60% of patients cluster in grade 2 with no clear separation of good versus bad prognosis. In an effort to solve this problem we propose to add cytological grading performed on fine needle aspirates or imprints. Indeed histological grade 2 (H2) group can be subdivided into 2 groups according to cytological grading: cytological grade 2 (C2) and grade 3 (C3). Analysis of cytometrical and proliferative features shows that H2 C3 tumors are closer from H3 C3 than from H2 C2 tumors. So, using morphological evaluation, we propose to classify breast carcinoma into 2 groups: 1 group associating histological grade 1 tumors and histological grade 2, cytological grade 2 tumors; group 2, associating histological grade 3 tumors and histological grade 2, cytological grade 3 tumors.
pubmed:language
fre
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Sep
pubmed:issn
0376-6160
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
77
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
33-6
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1993
pubmed:articleTitle
[Usefulness of cytoprognostic classification combined with histoprognostic classification in breast cancer].
pubmed:affiliation
Equipe de Cytologie Quantitative, Faculté de Médecine, La Tronche.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, English Abstract