1,721,138 research outputs found

    Intraepithelial G3 adenocarcinoma of the endometrium after tamoxifen treatment

    No full text
    Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2005 Jan;271(1):62-5. Epub 2004 Aug 3. Intraepithelial G3 adenocarcinoma of the endometrium after tamoxifen treatment. Marchesoni D, Driul L, Mozzanega B, Nardelli GB, Parenti A. SourceDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Udine, Piazzale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 33100 Udine, Italy. [email protected] Abstract CASE REPORT: In this paper we describe a case of endometrial carcinoma observed in a post-menopausal patient who was treated with tamoxifen for 5 years after a mastectomy for cancer. She came to our department because of vaginal bleeding 2 years after the end of tamoxifen treatment. TREATMENT: She underwent hysteroscopy and a D and C. A polypoid endometrium completely filled the uterine cavity and was carefully removed by curettage; histology showed a highly undifferentiated neoplasia with a component of serous adenocarcinoma, which was likely to originate from endometrial polyps. OUTCOME: The patient underwent radical hysterectomy, but no residual tumor was found in the uterus or in the tubes, ovary, or pelvic nodes, in spite of its low differentiation grade and high potential aggressiveness, and even though the patient was already symptomatic. Two years after surgery the patient is disease free, which is consistent with the evaluation of the surgical specimen, but unusual in poorly differentiated neoplasm

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore