Re: The revised 2009 FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer should the 1988 FIGO stages IA and IB be altered?

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 178-179

  Wen, Kuo Chang ^a,b,c   Sung, Pi Lin ^a,c   Wang, Peng Hui ^a,c  

^a NATIONAL YANG MING UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b Chutung Veterans Hospital   (Taiwan)

^c TAIPEI VETERANS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER STAGING; CAUSE SPECIFIC SURVIVAL; ENDOMETRIUM CANCER; HUMAN; LETTER; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL RATE;

ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; NEOPLASM STAGING;

EID: 84863270567     PISSN: 1048891X     EISSN: 15251438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31822e2991     Document Type: Letter

References (3)

1. Abu-Rustum NR, Zhou Q, Iasonos A, et al. The revised 2009 FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer: should the 1988 FIGO stages IA and IB be altered? Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21:511-516.
2. Lewin SN, Herzog TJ, BarrenaMedel NI, et al. Comparative performance of the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics' staging system for uterine corpus cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1141-1149.
3. Cooke EW, Pappas L, Gaffney DK. Does the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for endometrial cancer lead to increased discrimination in patient outcomes? Cancer. 2011;117:4231-4237.