The molecular genetics and morphometry‐based endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia classification system predicts disease progression in endometrial hyperplasia more accurately than the 1994 World Health Organization classification system

The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of disease progression prediction of the molecular genetics and morphometry‐based Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia (EIN) and World Health Organization 1994 (WHO94) classification systems in patients with endometrial hyperplasias.

[1]  J. Baak,et al.  Prediction of endometrial carcinoma by subjective endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis , 2005, Modern Pathology.

[2]  G. Mutter.  Histopathology of genetically defined endometrial precancers. , 2000, International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists.

[3]  P D Bezemer,et al.  Architectural and nuclear morphometrical features together are more important prognosticators in endometrial hyperplasias than nuclear morphometrical features alone , 1988, The Journal of pathology.

[4]  J P Baak,et al.  Quantitative nuclear image analysis: differentiation between normal, hyperplastic, and malignant appearing uterine glands in a paraffin section. IV. The use of Markov chain texture features in discriminant analysis. , 1978, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[5]  J. Baak,et al.  Computerised morphometrical analysis in endometrial hyperplasia for the prediction of cancer development. A long term retrospective study from northern Norway , 2000, Journal of clinical pathology.

[6]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of the Morphometric D-Score for Prediction of the Outcome of Endometrial Hyperplasias , 2001, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[7]  J. Baak.  Manual of quantitative pathology in cancer diagnosis and prognosis , 1991 .

[8]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Prospective multicenter validation confirms the prognostic superiority of the endometrial carcinoma prognostic index in international Federation of gynecology and obstetrics stage 1 and 2 endometrial carcinoma. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  J. Baak,et al.  Discrimination of hyperplasia and carcinoma of the endometrium by quantitative microscopy–a feasibility study , 1981, Histopathology.

[10]  M. Sherman,et al.  Endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma: a distinctive lesion specifically associated with tumors displaying serous differentiation. , 1995, Human pathology.

[11]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Use of computerized morphometric analyses of endometrial hyperplasias in the prediction of coexistent cancer. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  B. Morrow,et al.  Hysterectomy surveillance--United States, 1980-1993. , 1997, MMWR. CDC surveillance summaries : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. CDC surveillance summaries.

[13]  T. Rollason.  Blaustein’s Pathology of the Female Genital Tract , 2003, Springer New York.

[14]  R. Zaino,et al.  Reproducibility of the diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia , 2006, Cancer.

[15]  Kathleen R. Cho,et al.  Reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia, and well-differentiated carcinoma. , 1998, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[16]  The additional prognostic value of morphometric nuclear arrangement and DNA-ploidy to other morphometric and stereologic features in endometrial hyperplasias , 1993, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[17]  Y. B. Kim,et al.  Does hysteroscopy improve upon the sensitivity of dilatation and curettage in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma? , 1998, Gynecologic oncology.

[18]  T. Stephenson,et al.  Manual of Quantitative Pathology in Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis , 1992 .

[19]  G. Mutter.  Diagnosis of premalignant endometrial disease. , 2002, Journal of clinical pathology.

[20]  M. Shyu,et al.  Clinical study of 381 postmenopausal bleeding patients. , 1993, Journal of the Formosan Medical Association = Taiwan yi zhi.

[21]  R M Richart,et al.  Endometrial precancer diagnosis by histopathology, clonal analysis, and computerized morphometry , 2000, The Journal of pathology.

[22]  G. Mutter,et al.  Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN): will it bring order to chaos? The Endometrial Collaborative Group. , 2000, Gynecologic oncology.

[23]  R. Kurman,et al.  The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long-term study of “untreated” hyperplasia in 170 patients , 1986 .

[24]  M. Masseroli,et al.  A multicentric European study testing the reproducibility of the WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasia with a proposal of a simplified working classification for biopsy and curettage specimens. , 1999, The American journal of surgical pathology.