Comparison of the FIGO and TNM staging systems for uterine cervix cancer based on classification of 6193 cases
A total of 6193 patients treated for uterine cervix cancer was studied by a collaborative study, aiming to compare the applicability of the TNM versus FIGO clinical staging systems. Retrospective assays of gynecological status were performed. It was found that the FIGO classification system is super...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Gynecologic oncology 1976-09, Vol.4 (3), p.270-277 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 277 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 270 |
| container_title | Gynecologic oncology |
| container_volume | 4 |
| creator | Tarłowska, Ludwika Łukawska, Krystyna Mielcarzewicz, Zofia Urbański, Krzysztof Skowroński, Stefan Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz Filipowska, Danuta Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna Cisek, Wiesław Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna Guzel, Leon |
| description | A total of 6193 patients treated for uterine cervix cancer was studied by a collaborative study, aiming to compare the applicability of the TNM versus FIGO clinical staging systems. Retrospective assays of gynecological status were performed. It was found that the FIGO classification system is superior to the TNM system concerning uterine cervix cancer in the aspects of simplicity, recording procedures, and prognostic value. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/0090-8258(76)90032-9 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_83556576</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>0090825876900329</els_id><sourcerecordid>83556576</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c271t-996cd1e527e2c35bf2434b76305fc005880a38430e76e13e0f052272c14ef1ea3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1P3DAQhq0KCsu2_4CDT1V7SBnbsRNfKlWrQpH4uMDZ8jpjMNokiyeLyr-vt0Ece5qR5n0faR7GTgV8FyDMGYCFqpW6_dqYbxZAycp-YAsBVlem1faALd4jx-yE6AlKCIQ8Yh-tqY2tF2xYjf3W50TjwMfIp0fk55cXt9wPHb-7ueY0-Yc0PHB6pQl74nHMfDdhTgPygPkl_eHBD2Xja0_Y8YIJG0-UYgp-SjPVCKtKjJA-scPoN4Sf3-aS3Z__ulv9rq5uLy5XP6-qIBsxVdaa0AnUskEZlF5HWat63RgFOgYA3bbgVVsrwMagUAgRtJSNDKLGKNCrJfsyc7d5fN4hTa5PFHCz8QOOO3Kt0troAlyyeg6GPBJljG6bU-_zqxPg9pbdXqHbK3SNcf8sO1tqp2_83brH7r00ay3nH_MZy48vCbOjkLBo6lLGMLluTP_n_wX-14pd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>83556576</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the FIGO and TNM staging systems for uterine cervix cancer based on classification of 6193 cases</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Tarłowska, Ludwika ; Łukawska, Krystyna ; Mielcarzewicz, Zofia ; Urbański, Krzysztof ; Skowroński, Stefan ; Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz ; Filipowska, Danuta ; Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna ; Cisek, Wiesław ; Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna ; Guzel, Leon</creator><creatorcontrib>Tarłowska, Ludwika ; Łukawska, Krystyna ; Mielcarzewicz, Zofia ; Urbański, Krzysztof ; Skowroński, Stefan ; Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz ; Filipowska, Danuta ; Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna ; Cisek, Wiesław ; Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna ; Guzel, Leon</creatorcontrib><description>A total of 6193 patients treated for uterine cervix cancer was studied by a collaborative study, aiming to compare the applicability of the TNM versus FIGO clinical staging systems. Retrospective assays of gynecological status were performed. It was found that the FIGO classification system is superior to the TNM system concerning uterine cervix cancer in the aspects of simplicity, recording procedures, and prognostic value.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-8258</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-6859</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0090-8258(76)90032-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 964694</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Female ; Humans ; Poland ; Prognosis ; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - mortality ; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - pathology</subject><ispartof>Gynecologic oncology, 1976-09, Vol.4 (3), p.270-277</ispartof><rights>1976</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c271t-996cd1e527e2c35bf2434b76305fc005880a38430e76e13e0f052272c14ef1ea3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c271t-996cd1e527e2c35bf2434b76305fc005880a38430e76e13e0f052272c14ef1ea3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0090825876900329$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/964694$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tarłowska, Ludwika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Łukawska, Krystyna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mielcarzewicz, Zofia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Urbański, Krzysztof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skowroński, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filipowska, Danuta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cisek, Wiesław</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guzel, Leon</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the FIGO and TNM staging systems for uterine cervix cancer based on classification of 6193 cases</title><title>Gynecologic oncology</title><addtitle>Gynecol Oncol</addtitle><description>A total of 6193 patients treated for uterine cervix cancer was studied by a collaborative study, aiming to compare the applicability of the TNM versus FIGO clinical staging systems. Retrospective assays of gynecological status were performed. It was found that the FIGO classification system is superior to the TNM system concerning uterine cervix cancer in the aspects of simplicity, recording procedures, and prognostic value.</description><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Poland</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - mortality</subject><subject>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - pathology</subject><issn>0090-8258</issn><issn>1095-6859</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1976</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1P3DAQhq0KCsu2_4CDT1V7SBnbsRNfKlWrQpH4uMDZ8jpjMNokiyeLyr-vt0Ece5qR5n0faR7GTgV8FyDMGYCFqpW6_dqYbxZAycp-YAsBVlem1faALd4jx-yE6AlKCIQ8Yh-tqY2tF2xYjf3W50TjwMfIp0fk55cXt9wPHb-7ueY0-Yc0PHB6pQl74nHMfDdhTgPygPkl_eHBD2Xja0_Y8YIJG0-UYgp-SjPVCKtKjJA-scPoN4Sf3-aS3Z__ulv9rq5uLy5XP6-qIBsxVdaa0AnUskEZlF5HWat63RgFOgYA3bbgVVsrwMagUAgRtJSNDKLGKNCrJfsyc7d5fN4hTa5PFHCz8QOOO3Kt0troAlyyeg6GPBJljG6bU-_zqxPg9pbdXqHbK3SNcf8sO1tqp2_83brH7r00ay3nH_MZy48vCbOjkLBo6lLGMLluTP_n_wX-14pd</recordid><startdate>197609</startdate><enddate>197609</enddate><creator>Tarłowska, Ludwika</creator><creator>Łukawska, Krystyna</creator><creator>Mielcarzewicz, Zofia</creator><creator>Urbański, Krzysztof</creator><creator>Skowroński, Stefan</creator><creator>Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz</creator><creator>Filipowska, Danuta</creator><creator>Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna</creator><creator>Cisek, Wiesław</creator><creator>Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna</creator><creator>Guzel, Leon</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</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>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>197609</creationdate><title>Comparison of the FIGO and TNM staging systems for uterine cervix cancer based on classification of 6193 cases</title><author>Tarłowska, Ludwika ; Łukawska, Krystyna ; Mielcarzewicz, Zofia ; Urbański, Krzysztof ; Skowroński, Stefan ; Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz ; Filipowska, Danuta ; Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna ; Cisek, Wiesław ; Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna ; Guzel, Leon</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c271t-996cd1e527e2c35bf2434b76305fc005880a38430e76e13e0f052272c14ef1ea3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1976</creationdate><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Poland</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - mortality</topic><topic>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - pathology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tarłowska, Ludwika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Łukawska, Krystyna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mielcarzewicz, Zofia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Urbański, Krzysztof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skowroński, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filipowska, Danuta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cisek, Wiesław</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guzel, Leon</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gynecologic oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tarłowska, Ludwika</au><au>Łukawska, Krystyna</au><au>Mielcarzewicz, Zofia</au><au>Urbański, Krzysztof</au><au>Skowroński, Stefan</au><au>Kuchowicz, Włodzimierz</au><au>Filipowska, Danuta</au><au>Kożuch-Gdak, Walentyna</au><au>Cisek, Wiesław</au><au>Domaradzka-Woźniak, Anna</au><au>Guzel, Leon</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the FIGO and TNM staging systems for uterine cervix cancer based on classification of 6193 cases</atitle><jtitle>Gynecologic oncology</jtitle><addtitle>Gynecol Oncol</addtitle><date>1976-09</date><risdate>1976</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>270</spage><epage>277</epage><pages>270-277</pages><issn>0090-8258</issn><eissn>1095-6859</eissn><abstract>A total of 6193 patients treated for uterine cervix cancer was studied by a collaborative study, aiming to compare the applicability of the TNM versus FIGO clinical staging systems. Retrospective assays of gynecological status were performed. It was found that the FIGO classification system is superior to the TNM system concerning uterine cervix cancer in the aspects of simplicity, recording procedures, and prognostic value.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>964694</pmid><doi>10.1016/0090-8258(76)90032-9</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0090-8258 |
| ispartof | Gynecologic oncology, 1976-09, Vol.4 (3), p.270-277 |
| issn | 0090-8258 1095-6859 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_83556576 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Female Humans Poland Prognosis Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - mortality Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - pathology |
| title | Comparison of the FIGO and TNM staging systems for uterine cervix cancer based on classification of 6193 cases |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T21%3A42%3A32IST&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=Comparison%20of%20the%20FIGO%20and%20TNM%20staging%20systems%20for%20uterine%20cervix%20cancer%20based%20on%20classification%20of%206193%20cases&rft.jtitle=Gynecologic%20oncology&rft.au=Tar%C5%82owska,%20Ludwika&rft.date=1976-09&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=270&rft.epage=277&rft.pages=270-277&rft.issn=0090-8258&rft.eissn=1095-6859&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0090-8258(76)90032-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E83556576%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=83556576&rft_id=info:pmid/964694&rft_els_id=0090825876900329&rfr_iscdi=true |