Page 64 - Strategies for non-invasive managementof high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia - prognostic biomarkers and immunotherapy Margot Maria Koeneman
P. 64
Chapter 2
80. Darragh TM, Colgan TJ, Thomas Cox J, et al. The Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology Standardization project for HPV-associated lesions: background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists. 2013;32(1):76-115.
81. Tsoumpou I, Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, et al. p16(INK4a) immunostaining in cytological and histological specimens from the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer treatment reviews. 2009;35(3):210-20.
82. Omori M, Hashi A, Nakazawa K, et al. Estimation of prognoses for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 by p16INK4a immunoexpression and high-risk HPV in situ hybridization signal types. American journal of clinical pathology. 2007;128(2):208-17.
83. Lu D, Yang X, Jiang NY, et al. IMP3, a new biomarker to predict progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia into invasive cancer. The American journal of surgical pathology. 2011;35(11):1638-45.
84. Uleberg KE, Ovestad IT, Munk AC, et al. Prediction of spontaneous regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia lesions grades 2 and 3 by proteomic analysis. International journal of proteomics. 2014;2014:129064.
85. Umar A. Cancer immunoprevention: a new approach to intercept cancer early. Cancer prevention research. 2014;7(11):1067-71.
86. Litjens RJ, Hopman AH, van de Vijver KK, Ramaekers FC, Kruitwagen RF, Kruse AJ. Molecular biomarkers in cervical cancer diagnosis: a critical appraisal. Expert opinion on medical diagnostics. 2013;7(4):365-77.(86)
62
