## BACKGROUND. Renal cell carcinomas include several distinct entities with a range of biologic and clinical behavior from relatively indolent to extremely aggressive. Although conventional prognostic factors such as stage and grade are quite useful, other clinical, laboratory, and pathologic find
Current prognostic factors-renal cell carcinoma : Workgroup No. 4
✍ Scribed by John R. Srigley; Robert V. P. Hutter; Arnold B. Gelb; Donald E. Henson; Gerald Kenney; Bernard F. King; Syed Raziuddin; Thomas M. Pisansky
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 1997
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 55 KB
- Volume
- 80
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0008-543X
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Category III, the final category applies to those factors that show some promise but do not meet the above criteria.
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES
cause they may be impractical, expensive, or unproven. Group II is an intermediate group expected to be available in the near future and Presented at ''Diagnosis and Prognosis of Renal characterized by greater requirements for time, money, and other Cell Carcinoma: 1997 Workshop,'' Rochester, resour
I n developing this proposal, the authors applied these principles: 1. The classification must be based on morphology yet be in line with the genetic facts as they are presently understood, and in line with the evolution of the neoplasms. 2. The terms should be simple, unambiguous, and reflect a sa
and papillary renal cell carcinoma. The data supporting the validity of nuclear grading for chromophobe carcinoma is not well estab-Presented at ''Diagnosis and Prognosis of Renal lished, but it seems reasonable to grade these tumors for ongoing
## Background and objectives: To establish appropriate therapeutic modalities for renal cell carcinoma (rcc), informations on the factors affecting prognosis of patients are essential. for this purpose, multivariate analysis including a large set of variables is necessary. ## Methods: Prognostic