Suppr超能文献

合作组试验中拉帕波特分类法与工作分类法的比较:东部肿瘤协作组的经验

A comparison between the Rappaport Classification and Working Formulation in cooperative group trials: the ECOG experience.

作者信息

Neiman R S, Cain K, Ben Arieh Y, Harrington D, Mann R B, Wolf B C

机构信息

Hematopathology Division, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis 46202.

出版信息

Hematol Pathol. 1992;6(2):61-70.

PMID:1607342
Abstract

The Working Formulation (WF) for the classification of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas was shown to be reproducible and clinically relevant in the original study. However, it has not yet been tested by an NCI-supported cooperative clinical oncology group. As a result, the Hematopathology Subcommittee of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) undertook a retrospective study to compare concordance and practical utility between the WF and the Rappaport Classification (RC). Data indicate that with appropriate modifications to minimize unclassifiable lymphomas, the WF can be effectively utilized in cooperative clinical oncology groups.

摘要

非霍奇金淋巴瘤分类的工作方案(WF)在最初的研究中显示出可重复性且与临床相关。然而,它尚未经过美国国立癌症研究所(NCI)支持的合作临床肿瘤学组的检验。因此,东部肿瘤协作组(ECOG)血液病理学小组委员会进行了一项回顾性研究,以比较WF与拉帕波特分类法(RC)之间的一致性和实际效用。数据表明,通过适当修改以尽量减少无法分类的淋巴瘤,WF可在合作临床肿瘤学组中得到有效应用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验