• 1
    Lepine LA, Hillis SD, Marchbanks PA, et al. Hysterectomy surveillance—United States, 1980–1993. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ. 1997; 46: 115.
  • 2
    Lin HH, Wu MY, Shyu MK, Chen D, Tsai JL, Hsieh CY. Clinical study of 381 postmenopausal bleeding patients. J Formos Med Assoc. 1993; 92: 241244.
  • 3
    Ben-Yehuda OM, Kim YB, Leuchter RS. Does hysteroscopy improve upon the sensitivity of dilatation and curettage in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma? Gynecol Oncol. 1998; 68: 47.
  • 4
    Baak JP, Orbo A, van Diest PJ, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the morphometric D-score for prediction of the outcome of endometrial hyperplasias. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001; 25: 930935.
  • 5
    Kurman RJ, Kaminski PF, Norris HJ. The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long term study of “untreated” hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer. 1985; 56: 403412.
  • 6
    Tavassoli FA, Stratton MR. Tumors of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon: IARC Press, 2003.
  • 7
    Silverberg SG, Kurman RJ, Nogales F, Mutter GL, Kubik-Huch RA, Tavassoli FA. Epithelial tumors and related lesions of endometrium. In: TavassoliFA, StrattonMR, editors. Tumors of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon: IARC Press, 2003: 221232.
  • 8
    Mutter GL. Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN): will it bring order to chaos? The Endometrial Collaborative Group. Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 76: 287290.
  • 9
    Zaino R, Trimble C, Silverberg S, Kauderer J, Curtin J. Reproducibility of the diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH): a Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) study[Abstract]. Lab Invest. 2004; 84( Suppl 1): 218A.
  • 10
    Baak JPA, Nauta JJP, Wisse-Bretelmans ECM, Bezemer PD. Architectural and morphological features together are more important prognosticators in endometrial hyperplasias than nuclear morphological features alone. J Pathol. 1988; 154: 335341.
  • 11
    Ørbo A, Baak JP, Kleivan I, et al. Computerised morphometrical analysis in endometrial hyperplasia for the prediction of cancer development. A long-term retrospective study from northern Norway. J Clin Pathol. 2000; 53: 697703.
  • 12
    Dunton CJ, Baak JPA, Palazzo JP, van Diest PJ, McHugh M, Widra EA. Use of computerized morphometric analyses of endometrial hyperplasias in the prediction of coexistent cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 174: 15181521.
  • 13
    Anderson MC, Robboy SJ, Russell P, Morse A. Endometrial hyperplasia. In: RobboySJ, AndersonMC, RussellP, editors. Pathology of the female reproductive tract. London: Churchill Livingstone, 2002: 305330.
  • 14
    Mutter GL, Baak JP, Crum CP, Richart RM, Ferenczy A, Faquin WC. Endometrial precancer diagnosis by histopathology, clonal analysis, and computerized morphometry. J Pathol. 2000; 190: 462469.
  • 15
    Mutter GL. Diagnosis of premalignant endometrial disease. J Clin Pathol. 2002; 55: 326331.
  • 16
    Mutter GL. Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia: a new standard for precancer diagnosis. Contemp Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 46: 9298.
  • 17
    Bergeron C, Nogales FF, Masseroli M, et al. A multicentric European study testing the reproducibility of the WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasia with a proposal of a simplified working classification for biopsy and curettage specimens. Am J Surg Pathol. 1999; 23: 11021108.
  • 18
    Kendall BS, Ronnett BM, Isacson C, et al. Reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia, and well-differentiated carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1998; 22: 10121019.
  • 19
    Ambros RA, Sherman ME, Zahn CM, Bitterman P, Kurman RJ. Endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma: a distinctive lesion specifically associated with tumors displaying serous differentiation. Hum Pathol. 1995; 26: 12601267.
  • 20
    Ronnett R, Kurman R. Precursor lesions of endometrial carcinoma. In: KurmanR, editor. Blaustein's pathology of the female genital tract. 5th edition. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002: 467500.
  • 21
    Diegenbach PC, Baak JP. Quantitative nuclear image analysis: differentiation between normal, hyperplastic, and malignant appearing uterine glands in a paraffin section. IV. The use of Markov chain texture features in discriminant analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1978; 8: 157162.
  • 22
    Baak JPA, Kuik DJ, Bezemer PD. The additional prognostic value of morphometric nuclear arrangement and DNA-ploidy to other morphometric and stereologic features in endometrial hyperplasias. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1994; 4: 289297.
  • 23
    Baak JP, Kurver PH, Diegenbach PC, Delemarre JF, Brekelmans EC, Nieuwlaat JE. Discrimination of hyperplasia and carcinoma of the endometrium by quantitative microscopy—a feasibility study. Histopathology. 1981; 5: 6168.
  • 24
    Mutter GL. Histopathology of genetically defined endometrial precancers. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2000; 19: 301309.
  • 25
    Baak JPA. Manual of quantitative pathology in cancer diagnosis and prognosis. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1991.
  • 26
    Baak JP, Snijders W, van Diermen B, van Diest PJ, Diepenhorst FW, Benraadt J. Prospective multicenter validation confirms the prognostic superiority of the endometrial carcinoma prognostic index in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage 1 and 2 endometrial carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 42144221.
  • 27
    Hecht JL, Ince TA, Baak JP, Baker HE, Ogden MW, Mutter GL. Prediction of endometrial carcinoma by subjective endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis. Mod Pathol. 2005; 18: 324330.