Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 286

1.

Pathological outcomes in men with low risk and very low risk prostate cancer: implications on the practice of active surveillance.

Tosoian JJ, JohnBull E, Trock BJ, Landis P, Epstein JI, Partin AW, Walsh PC, Carter HB.

J Urol. 2013 Oct;190(4):1218-22. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.071. Epub 2013 Apr 30.

2.

Expanded criteria to identify men eligible for active surveillance of low risk prostate cancer at Johns Hopkins: a preliminary analysis.

Reese AC, Landis P, Han M, Epstein JI, Carter HB.

J Urol. 2013 Dec;190(6):2033-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.015. Epub 2013 May 13.

PMID:
23680308
3.

Population based study of predictors of adverse pathology among candidates for active surveillance with Gleason 6 prostate cancer.

Vellekoop A, Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Stattin P.

J Urol. 2014 Feb;191(2):350-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.09.034. Epub 2013 Sep 23.

PMID:
24071481
4.

What is the optimal definition of misclassification in patients with very low-risk prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance? Results from a multi-institutional series.

Gandaglia G, Ploussard G, Isbarn H, Suardi N, De Visschere PJ, Futterer JJ, Ghadjar P, Massard C, Ost P, Sooriakumaran P, Surcel CI, van der Bergh RC, Montorsi F, Ficarra V, Giannarini G, Briganti A; Prostate Cancer Working Group of Young Academic Urologists Working Party of European Association of Urology.

Urol Oncol. 2015 Apr;33(4):164.e1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.12.011. Epub 2015 Jan 22.

PMID:
25620154
5.

Untreated Gleason Grade Progression on Serial Biopsies during Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Clinical Course and Pathological Outcomes.

Hussein AA, Welty CJ, Ameli N, Cowan JE, Leapman M, Porten SP, Shinohara K, Carroll PR.

J Urol. 2015 Jul;194(1):85-90. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.077. Epub 2015 Jan 23.

PMID:
25623742
6.
7.

Prediction of pathological stage in patients with clinical stage T1c prostate cancer: the new challenge.

Veltri RW, Miller MC, Mangold LA, O'Dowd GJ, Epstein JI, Partin AW.

J Urol. 2002 Jul;168(1):100-4.

PMID:
12050500
8.

Limitations in Predicting Organ Confined Prostate Cancer in Patients with Gleason Pattern 4 on Biopsy: Implications for Active Surveillance.

Perlis N, Sayyid R, Evans A, Van Der Kwast T, Toi A, Finelli A, Kulkarni G, Hamilton R, Zlotta AR, Trachtenberg J, Ghai S, Fleshner NE.

J Urol. 2017 Jan;197(1):75-83. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.076. Epub 2016 Jul 22.

PMID:
27457260
9.

Pathological findings and prostate specific antigen outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men eligible for active surveillance--does the risk of misclassification vary according to biopsy criteria?

Ploussard G, Salomon L, Xylinas E, Allory Y, Vordos D, Hoznek A, Abbou CC, de la Taille A.

J Urol. 2010 Feb;183(2):539-44. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.009. Epub 2009 Dec 14.

10.

Immediate versus delayed radical prostatectomy: updated outcomes following active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Filippou P, Welty CJ, Cowan JE, Perez N, Shinohara K, Carroll PR.

Eur Urol. 2015 Sep;68(3):458-63. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.011. Epub 2015 Jun 29.

PMID:
26138041
11.

Heterogeneity in D'Amico classification-based low-risk prostate cancer: Differences in upgrading and upstaging according to active surveillance eligibility.

Schiffmann J, Wenzel P, Salomon G, Budäus L, Schlomm T, Minner S, Wittmer C, Kraft S, Krech T, Steurer S, Sauter G, Beyer B, Boehm K, Tilki D, Michl U, Huland H, Graefen M, Karakiewicz PI.

Urol Oncol. 2015 Jul;33(7):329.e13-9. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.04.004. Epub 2015 May 7.

PMID:
25960411
12.

Percent of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer is significant independent predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence following radical prostatectomy: results from SEARCH database.

Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Dorey F, Presti JC Jr; SEARCH Database Study Group.

J Urol. 2003 Jun;169(6):2136-41.

PMID:
12771735
13.

Prostate-specific antigen vs prostate-specific antigen density as a predictor of upgrading in men diagnosed with Gleason 6 prostate cancer by contemporary multicore prostate biopsy.

Oh JJ, Hong SK, Lee JK, Lee BK, Lee S, Kwon OS, Byun SS, Lee SE.

BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11 Pt B):E494-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11182.x. Epub 2012 Apr 30.

14.

Preoperative neural network using combined magnetic resonance imaging variables, prostate specific antigen and Gleason score to predict prostate cancer stage.

Poulakis V, Witzsch U, De Vries R, Emmerlich V, Meves M, Altmannsberger HM, Becht E.

J Urol. 2004 Oct;172(4 Pt 1):1306-10.

PMID:
15371829
15.

Analysis of expanded criteria to select candidates for active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer.

Jo JK, Lee HS, Lee YI, Lee SE, Hong SK.

Asian J Androl. 2015 Mar-Apr;17(2):248-52. doi: 10.4103/1008-682X.142136.

16.
17.

The ability of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density to predict an upgrade in Gleason score between initial prostate biopsy and prostatectomy diminishes with increasing tumour grade due to reduced PSA secretion per unit tumour volume.

Corcoran NM, Casey RG, Hong MK, Pedersen J, Connolly S, Peters J, Harewood L, Gleave ME, Costello AJ, Hovens CM, Goldenberg SL.

BJU Int. 2012 Jul;110(1):36-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10681.x. Epub 2011 Nov 15.

18.

Preoperative predictors of pathologic stage T2a and pathologic Gleason score ≤ 6 in men with clinical low-risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: reference for active surveillance.

Fu Q, Moul JW, Bañez L, Sun L, Mouraviev V, Xie D, Polascik TJ.

Med Oncol. 2013 Mar;30(1):326. doi: 10.1007/s12032-012-0326-5. Epub 2012 Dec 22.

PMID:
23263824
19.

Adverse Pathologic Findings for Men Electing Immediate Radical Prostatectomy: Defining a Favorable Intermediate-Risk Group.

Patel HD, Tosoian JJ, Carter HB, Epstein JI.

JAMA Oncol. 2017 Jul 13. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.1879. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
28715578
20.

Is active surveillance a safe alternative in the management of localized prostate cancer? Pathological features of radical prostatectomy specimens in potential candidates for active surveillance.

Norman Z, Militza P, Andres F, Daniela F, Alejandro M, Catherine S, Juan F.

Int Braz J Urol. 2014 Mar-Apr;40(2):154-9. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.02.04.

Supplemental Content

Support Center