1979
DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1129194
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Aktuelle Aspekte des Pankreaskarzinoms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
2
0
2

Year Published

1983
1983
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
2
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…We ascertained in our prospective study a sensitivity of 92% for this monoganglioside antigen for pancreatic carcinoma, a specificity of 85%, and a total accuracy of 82%. In accordance with the existing findings and the results of Del Villano et al" and Klapdor et al,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] who confirmed this high sensitivity, measurement of CA 19-9 value is superior to all other tumor markers in pancreatic carcinoma patients.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…We ascertained in our prospective study a sensitivity of 92% for this monoganglioside antigen for pancreatic carcinoma, a specificity of 85%, and a total accuracy of 82%. In accordance with the existing findings and the results of Del Villano et al" and Klapdor et al,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] who confirmed this high sensitivity, measurement of CA 19-9 value is superior to all other tumor markers in pancreatic carcinoma patients.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Our examples of ductal adenocarcinoma, mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, adenosquamous carcinoma and pleomorphic carcinoma of the giant cell type corresponded in frequency age, sex, site, size, spread and prognosis with the relevant data in the literature (Miller et al 1951, Sommers & Meissner 1954, Bell 1957, Frantz 1959, Baylor & Berg 1973, Becker 1973, Kissane 1975, Alguacil-Garcia & Weiland 1977, Tschang et al 1977, Kloppel et al 1979, Cubilla et al 1978, Cubilla & Fitzgerald 1979, Ishikawa et al 1980, Widgren 1980. Prognosis was bad for all these carcinomas, and with no obvious differences between the well-differentiated adenocarcinoma, poorly-differentiated adenocarcinoma and mucinous carcinoma.…”
Section: Exocrine Pancreatic Turnours 657mentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The TNM classification of the adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas excluding papillary and periampullary carcinomas is of vital importance [9]. One should differentiate particularly all those tumor stages with invasion of neighboring organs; invasion of the duodenum is demonstrated quite often but does not seem to be of decisive prognostic importance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%