1. Neuroblastoma: review of the literature and an examinati.on of factors contributing to its enigmatic character. Cancer intraor interobserver differences of classification. In Treat Rev 1976; 3: 61-82. contrast to the findings of Shimada, our smaller study group did not contain any focal nodular or well differentiated stroma rich groups, and there were proportionally slightly more stroma poor cases;Jaffe, N.
2. Neuroblastoma: influence of age at diagnosis, stage, tumour, site and sex on prognosis;Coldman, A.J.; Fryer, C.J.; Elwood, J.M.; Sonley, M.J.;Cancer,1980
3. Histopathologic prognostic factors in neuroblastic tumors: definition ofsubtypes were, however, significant differences between the mean numbers ofNORs in the stroma rich and stroma poor neuroblastomas and a close correlation between NORs and MKI in stroma poor cases. The differences of ganglioneuroblastoma and an age-linked classification of neuroblastomas;Shimada, H.; Chatten, J.; Newton, W.A.;JNCI,1984
4. Microscopic patterns as a guide to prognosis of neuroblastoma in childhood;Makinen, J.;Cancer,1972
5. Biochemical and histological determinants in the prognosis of neuroblastoma;Gitlow, S.E.; Bertani-Dziedzic, L.; Strauss, L.; el al;Cancer,1973