Which Is the Optimal Risk Stratification System for Surgically Treated Localized Primary GIST? Comparison of Three Contemporary Prognostic Criteria in 171 Tumors and a Proposal for a Modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Risk Criteria
Background This study aims to validate and compare the performance of the National Institute of Health (NIH) criteria, Huang modified NIH criteria, and Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) risk criteria for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) in a large series of localized primary GISTs su...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of surgical oncology 2008-08, Vol.15 (8), p.2153-2163 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2163 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 2153 |
container_title | Annals of surgical oncology |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Goh, Brian K. P. Chow, Pierce K. H. Yap, Wai-Ming Kesavan, Sittampalam M. Song, In-Chin Paul, Pradeep G. Ooi, Boon-Swee Chung, Yaw-Fui A. Wong, Wai-Keong |
description | Background
This study aims to validate and compare the performance of the National Institute of Health (NIH) criteria, Huang modified NIH criteria, and Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) risk criteria for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) in a large series of localized primary GISTs surgically treated at a single institution to determine the ideal risk stratification system for GIST.
Methods
The clinicopathological features of 171 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection for GISTs were retrospectively reviewed. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the prognostic value of the three risk criteria by analyzing the discriminatory ability linear trend, homogeneity, monotonicity of gradients, and Akaike information criteria.
Results
The median actuarial recurrence-free survival (RFS) for all 171 patients was 70%. On multivariate analyses, size >10 cm, mitotic count >5/50 high-power field, tumor necrosis, and serosal involvement were independent prognostic factors of RFS. All three risk criteria demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the recurrence rate, median actuarial RFS, actuarial 5-year RFS, and tumor-specific death across the different stages. Comparison of the various risk-stratification systems demonstrated that our proposed modified AFIP criteria had the best independent predictive value of RFS when compared with the other systems.
Conclusion
The NIH, modified NIH, and AFIP criteria are useful in the prognostication of GIST, and the AFIP risk criteria provided the best prognostication among the three systems for primary localized GIST. However, remarkable prognostic heterogeneity exists in the AFIP high-risk category, and with our proposed modification, this system provides the most accurate prognostic information. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1245/s10434-008-9969-z |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69349979</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1518927941</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-e35589e8d4115680ec00a2be120ad11d2e555c950e7a412d1c89b3e68d9cd1ae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UsGO0zAQjRCIXRY-gAsaceAWsBM7jU9oVbG7lYq2okUcI9eZtl6SOGs7h_av-YOdKEUrIXEZj2fevBmPX5K85-wzz4T8EjgTuUgZK1OlCpWeXiSXXFJEFCV_ST4rKJMV8iJ5E8IDY3yWM_k6ueClFAUT8jL58-tgzQEWAeIB4b6PttUN_LDhN6yj19HurCHrOlgfQ8QWds7DevB7CjfNETYedcQalo7u9kTeyhOFP8LtYr35CnPX9trbQARuB5uDR6RYR0y98yNs5d2-cyFaA3NvI3qrwXbAZxw2Q-t8AN3VoEdc7wLNNg6g4buraTRqd-1bsjfOGwyw6IgoDhHHZisdD65x--P0nL_sb5NXO90EfHc-r5KfN98287t0eX-7mF8vUyNyGVPMpSwVlrXgXBYlQ8OYzrbIM6ZrzusMpZRGSYYzLXhWc1OqbY5FWStTc435VfJp4u29exwwxKq1wWDT6A7dEKpC5UKpmSLgx3-AD27wHc1WZdksL1UuBYH4BDLeheBxV_XTnivOqlEM1SSGisRQjWKoTlTz4Uw8bGlJzxXn3ydANgECpbo9-ufO_2d9AnWoxAw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>227389354</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Which Is the Optimal Risk Stratification System for Surgically Treated Localized Primary GIST? Comparison of Three Contemporary Prognostic Criteria in 171 Tumors and a Proposal for a Modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Risk Criteria</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Goh, Brian K. P. ; Chow, Pierce K. H. ; Yap, Wai-Ming ; Kesavan, Sittampalam M. ; Song, In-Chin ; Paul, Pradeep G. ; Ooi, Boon-Swee ; Chung, Yaw-Fui A. ; Wong, Wai-Keong</creator><creatorcontrib>Goh, Brian K. P. ; Chow, Pierce K. H. ; Yap, Wai-Ming ; Kesavan, Sittampalam M. ; Song, In-Chin ; Paul, Pradeep G. ; Ooi, Boon-Swee ; Chung, Yaw-Fui A. ; Wong, Wai-Keong</creatorcontrib><description>Background
This study aims to validate and compare the performance of the National Institute of Health (NIH) criteria, Huang modified NIH criteria, and Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) risk criteria for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) in a large series of localized primary GISTs surgically treated at a single institution to determine the ideal risk stratification system for GIST.
Methods
The clinicopathological features of 171 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection for GISTs were retrospectively reviewed. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the prognostic value of the three risk criteria by analyzing the discriminatory ability linear trend, homogeneity, monotonicity of gradients, and Akaike information criteria.
Results
The median actuarial recurrence-free survival (RFS) for all 171 patients was 70%. On multivariate analyses, size >10 cm, mitotic count >5/50 high-power field, tumor necrosis, and serosal involvement were independent prognostic factors of RFS. All three risk criteria demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the recurrence rate, median actuarial RFS, actuarial 5-year RFS, and tumor-specific death across the different stages. Comparison of the various risk-stratification systems demonstrated that our proposed modified AFIP criteria had the best independent predictive value of RFS when compared with the other systems.
Conclusion
The NIH, modified NIH, and AFIP criteria are useful in the prognostication of GIST, and the AFIP risk criteria provided the best prognostication among the three systems for primary localized GIST. However, remarkable prognostic heterogeneity exists in the AFIP high-risk category, and with our proposed modification, this system provides the most accurate prognostic information.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1068-9265</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-4681</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1245/s10434-008-9969-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18546045</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Female ; Gastrointestinal Oncology ; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - pathology ; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - surgery ; Humans ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local ; Neoplasm Staging ; Oncology ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Prognosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Assessment ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology</subject><ispartof>Annals of surgical oncology, 2008-08, Vol.15 (8), p.2153-2163</ispartof><rights>Society of Surgical Oncology 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-e35589e8d4115680ec00a2be120ad11d2e555c950e7a412d1c89b3e68d9cd1ae3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-e35589e8d4115680ec00a2be120ad11d2e555c950e7a412d1c89b3e68d9cd1ae3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1245/s10434-008-9969-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1245/s10434-008-9969-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18546045$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Goh, Brian K. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chow, Pierce K. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yap, Wai-Ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kesavan, Sittampalam M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, In-Chin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paul, Pradeep G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ooi, Boon-Swee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Yaw-Fui A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Wai-Keong</creatorcontrib><title>Which Is the Optimal Risk Stratification System for Surgically Treated Localized Primary GIST? Comparison of Three Contemporary Prognostic Criteria in 171 Tumors and a Proposal for a Modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Risk Criteria</title><title>Annals of surgical oncology</title><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><description>Background
This study aims to validate and compare the performance of the National Institute of Health (NIH) criteria, Huang modified NIH criteria, and Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) risk criteria for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) in a large series of localized primary GISTs surgically treated at a single institution to determine the ideal risk stratification system for GIST.
Methods
The clinicopathological features of 171 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection for GISTs were retrospectively reviewed. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the prognostic value of the three risk criteria by analyzing the discriminatory ability linear trend, homogeneity, monotonicity of gradients, and Akaike information criteria.
Results
The median actuarial recurrence-free survival (RFS) for all 171 patients was 70%. On multivariate analyses, size >10 cm, mitotic count >5/50 high-power field, tumor necrosis, and serosal involvement were independent prognostic factors of RFS. All three risk criteria demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the recurrence rate, median actuarial RFS, actuarial 5-year RFS, and tumor-specific death across the different stages. Comparison of the various risk-stratification systems demonstrated that our proposed modified AFIP criteria had the best independent predictive value of RFS when compared with the other systems.
Conclusion
The NIH, modified NIH, and AFIP criteria are useful in the prognostication of GIST, and the AFIP risk criteria provided the best prognostication among the three systems for primary localized GIST. However, remarkable prognostic heterogeneity exists in the AFIP high-risk category, and with our proposed modification, this system provides the most accurate prognostic information.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastrointestinal Oncology</subject><subject>Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - pathology</subject><subject>Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Neoplasm Recurrence, Local</subject><subject>Neoplasm Staging</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><issn>1068-9265</issn><issn>1534-4681</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UsGO0zAQjRCIXRY-gAsaceAWsBM7jU9oVbG7lYq2okUcI9eZtl6SOGs7h_av-YOdKEUrIXEZj2fevBmPX5K85-wzz4T8EjgTuUgZK1OlCpWeXiSXXFJEFCV_ST4rKJMV8iJ5E8IDY3yWM_k6ueClFAUT8jL58-tgzQEWAeIB4b6PttUN_LDhN6yj19HurCHrOlgfQ8QWds7DevB7CjfNETYedcQalo7u9kTeyhOFP8LtYr35CnPX9trbQARuB5uDR6RYR0y98yNs5d2-cyFaA3NvI3qrwXbAZxw2Q-t8AN3VoEdc7wLNNg6g4buraTRqd-1bsjfOGwyw6IgoDhHHZisdD65x--P0nL_sb5NXO90EfHc-r5KfN98287t0eX-7mF8vUyNyGVPMpSwVlrXgXBYlQ8OYzrbIM6ZrzusMpZRGSYYzLXhWc1OqbY5FWStTc435VfJp4u29exwwxKq1wWDT6A7dEKpC5UKpmSLgx3-AD27wHc1WZdksL1UuBYH4BDLeheBxV_XTnivOqlEM1SSGisRQjWKoTlTz4Uw8bGlJzxXn3ydANgECpbo9-ufO_2d9AnWoxAw</recordid><startdate>20080801</startdate><enddate>20080801</enddate><creator>Goh, Brian K. P.</creator><creator>Chow, Pierce K. H.</creator><creator>Yap, Wai-Ming</creator><creator>Kesavan, Sittampalam M.</creator><creator>Song, In-Chin</creator><creator>Paul, Pradeep G.</creator><creator>Ooi, Boon-Swee</creator><creator>Chung, Yaw-Fui A.</creator><creator>Wong, Wai-Keong</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080801</creationdate><title>Which Is the Optimal Risk Stratification System for Surgically Treated Localized Primary GIST? Comparison of Three Contemporary Prognostic Criteria in 171 Tumors and a Proposal for a Modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Risk Criteria</title><author>Goh, Brian K. P. ; Chow, Pierce K. H. ; Yap, Wai-Ming ; Kesavan, Sittampalam M. ; Song, In-Chin ; Paul, Pradeep G. ; Ooi, Boon-Swee ; Chung, Yaw-Fui A. ; Wong, Wai-Keong</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-e35589e8d4115680ec00a2be120ad11d2e555c950e7a412d1c89b3e68d9cd1ae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastrointestinal Oncology</topic><topic>Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - pathology</topic><topic>Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Neoplasm Recurrence, Local</topic><topic>Neoplasm Staging</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Goh, Brian K. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chow, Pierce K. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yap, Wai-Ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kesavan, Sittampalam M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, In-Chin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paul, Pradeep G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ooi, Boon-Swee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Yaw-Fui A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Wai-Keong</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Goh, Brian K. P.</au><au>Chow, Pierce K. H.</au><au>Yap, Wai-Ming</au><au>Kesavan, Sittampalam M.</au><au>Song, In-Chin</au><au>Paul, Pradeep G.</au><au>Ooi, Boon-Swee</au><au>Chung, Yaw-Fui A.</au><au>Wong, Wai-Keong</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Which Is the Optimal Risk Stratification System for Surgically Treated Localized Primary GIST? Comparison of Three Contemporary Prognostic Criteria in 171 Tumors and a Proposal for a Modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Risk Criteria</atitle><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle><stitle>Ann Surg Oncol</stitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><date>2008-08-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>2153</spage><epage>2163</epage><pages>2153-2163</pages><issn>1068-9265</issn><eissn>1534-4681</eissn><abstract>Background
This study aims to validate and compare the performance of the National Institute of Health (NIH) criteria, Huang modified NIH criteria, and Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) risk criteria for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) in a large series of localized primary GISTs surgically treated at a single institution to determine the ideal risk stratification system for GIST.
Methods
The clinicopathological features of 171 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection for GISTs were retrospectively reviewed. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the prognostic value of the three risk criteria by analyzing the discriminatory ability linear trend, homogeneity, monotonicity of gradients, and Akaike information criteria.
Results
The median actuarial recurrence-free survival (RFS) for all 171 patients was 70%. On multivariate analyses, size >10 cm, mitotic count >5/50 high-power field, tumor necrosis, and serosal involvement were independent prognostic factors of RFS. All three risk criteria demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the recurrence rate, median actuarial RFS, actuarial 5-year RFS, and tumor-specific death across the different stages. Comparison of the various risk-stratification systems demonstrated that our proposed modified AFIP criteria had the best independent predictive value of RFS when compared with the other systems.
Conclusion
The NIH, modified NIH, and AFIP criteria are useful in the prognostication of GIST, and the AFIP risk criteria provided the best prognostication among the three systems for primary localized GIST. However, remarkable prognostic heterogeneity exists in the AFIP high-risk category, and with our proposed modification, this system provides the most accurate prognostic information.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>18546045</pmid><doi>10.1245/s10434-008-9969-z</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1068-9265 |
ispartof | Annals of surgical oncology, 2008-08, Vol.15 (8), p.2153-2163 |
issn | 1068-9265 1534-4681 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69349979 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Female Gastrointestinal Oncology Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - pathology Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors - surgery Humans Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Neoplasm Recurrence, Local Neoplasm Staging Oncology Predictive Value of Tests Prognosis Retrospective Studies Risk Assessment Surgery Surgical Oncology |
title | Which Is the Optimal Risk Stratification System for Surgically Treated Localized Primary GIST? Comparison of Three Contemporary Prognostic Criteria in 171 Tumors and a Proposal for a Modified Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Risk Criteria |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T15%3A51%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Which%20Is%20the%20Optimal%20Risk%20Stratification%20System%20for%20Surgically%20Treated%20Localized%20Primary%20GIST?%20Comparison%20of%20Three%20Contemporary%20Prognostic%20Criteria%20in%20171%20Tumors%20and%20a%20Proposal%20for%20a%20Modified%20Armed%20Forces%20Institute%20of%20Pathology%20Risk%20Criteria&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20surgical%20oncology&rft.au=Goh,%20Brian%20K.%20P.&rft.date=2008-08-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=2153&rft.epage=2163&rft.pages=2153-2163&rft.issn=1068-9265&rft.eissn=1534-4681&rft_id=info:doi/10.1245/s10434-008-9969-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1518927941%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=227389354&rft_id=info:pmid/18546045&rfr_iscdi=true |