1993
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1993.245
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evidence for field change in oral cancer based on cytokeratin expression

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
30
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…observed in up to 30% of the cases (30). This will additionally support the value of cytokeratin alteration during pathogenesis of oral cancer.…”
Section: ------------------------------------------------------------supporting
confidence: 71%
“…observed in up to 30% of the cases (30). This will additionally support the value of cytokeratin alteration during pathogenesis of oral cancer.…”
Section: ------------------------------------------------------------supporting
confidence: 71%
“…4J), a marker for head-andneck epithelia but not normal or hyperplastic epidermis (Bloor et al 1998), and positive staining for K18 (Fig. 4K), a marker for late-stage SCC (Ogden et al 1993). In metastatic lesions, keratin pearls were evident (Fig.…”
Section: Head-and-neck Epithelia With Tgf␤rii Deletion Together With mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…This concept of field cancerization is supported by various histological, cytological and molecular evidence in which normal epithelium has been compared with adjacent tumour tissue which demonstrated similar subcellular and biochemical changes [7][8][9]. The histopathological and cytologic diagnosis of oral cancer is based on epithelial dysplastic features which has subjective variation, with wide variation between observers in the subjective evaluation of epithelial dysplasia has and been commented on by several authors [10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…The histopathological and cytologic diagnosis of oral cancer is based on epithelial dysplastic features which has subjective variation, with wide variation between observers in the subjective evaluation of epithelial dysplasia has and been commented on by several authors [10]. Also the molecular methods are very expensive [8]. To overcome unreliability in the subjective examination of these features a more objective approach would be the value which is mainly based on image analysis techniques.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%