Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 94

1.

Evidence-based approach to active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Witherspoon L, Breau RH, Lavallée LT.

World J Urol. 2019 Feb 6. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02662-5. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
30726506
2.

Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, Bokhorst LP, Rannikko A, Klotz L, Villers A, Hugosson J, Moore CM.

Eur Urol. 2015 Apr;67(4):627-36. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.050. Epub 2014 Nov 15. Review.

PMID:
25511988
3.

Reporting Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The PRECISE Recommendations-A Report of a European School of Oncology Task Force.

Moore CM, Giganti F, Albertsen P, Allen C, Bangma C, Briganti A, Carroll P, Haider M, Kasivisvanathan V, Kirkham A, Klotz L, Ouzzane A, Padhani AR, Panebianco V, Pinto P, Puech P, Rannikko A, Renard-Penna R, Touijer K, Turkbey B, van Poppel H, Valdagni R, Walz J, Schoots I.

Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):648-655. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.011. Epub 2016 Jun 24.

PMID:
27349615
4.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Active Surveillance Strategies for Men with Low-risk Prostate Cancer.

Sathianathen NJ, Konety BR, Alarid-Escudero F, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton DM, Kuntz KM.

Eur Urol. 2018 Nov 10. pii: S0302-2838(18)30853-4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.055. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
30425010
5.

An evidence review of active surveillance in men with localized prostate cancer.

Ip S, Dahabreh IJ, Chung M, Yu WW, Balk EM, Iovin RC, Mathew P, Luongo T, Dvorak T, Lau J.

Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2011 Dec;(204):1-341. Review.

6.

Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Identification, Management, and Outcomes.

Moschini M, Carroll PR, Eggener SE, Epstein JI, Graefen M, Montironi R, Parker C.

Eur Urol. 2017 Aug;72(2):238-249. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.009. Epub 2017 Mar 18. Review.

PMID:
28318726
7.

NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer.

Ganz PA, Barry JM, Burke W, Col NF, Corso PS, Dodson E, Hammond ME, Kogan BA, Lynch CF, Newcomer L, Seifter EJ, Tooze JA, Viswanath KV, Wessells H.

NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2011 Dec 5-7;28(1):1-27.

PMID:
23392076
8.

Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance-a modern approach.

Giganti F, Moore CM.

Transl Androl Urol. 2018 Feb;7(1):116-131. doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.12.23. Review.

9.

Active surveillance compared with initial treatment for men with low-risk prostate cancer: a decision analysis.

Hayes JH, Ollendorf DA, Pearson SD, Barry MJ, Kantoff PW, Stewart ST, Bhatnagar V, Sweeney CJ, Stahl JE, McMahon PM.

JAMA. 2010 Dec 1;304(21):2373-80. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1720. Erratum in: JAMA. 2011 May 11;305(18):1862.

10.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Factors Determining Change to Radical Treatment in Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer.

Simpkin AJ, Tilling K, Martin RM, Lane JA, Hamdy FC, Holmberg L, Neal DE, Metcalfe C, Donovan JL.

Eur Urol. 2015 Jun;67(6):993-1005. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.004. Epub 2015 Jan 21. Review.

PMID:
25616709
11.

Outcomes of initially expectantly managed patients with low or intermediate risk screen-detected localized prostate cancer.

Bul M, van den Bergh RC, Zhu X, Rannikko A, Vasarainen H, Bangma CH, Schröder FH, Roobol MJ.

BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11):1672-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11434.x. Epub 2012 Aug 29.

12.

Active surveillance for prostate cancer: can we modernize contemporary protocols to improve patient selection and outcomes in the focal therapy era?

Tay KJ, Mendez M, Moul JW, Polascik TJ.

Curr Opin Urol. 2015 May;25(3):185-90. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000168. Review.

PMID:
25768694
13.
14.

Novel tools to improve patient selection and monitoring on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review.

van den Bergh RC, Ahmed HU, Bangma CH, Cooperberg MR, Villers A, Parker CC.

Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1023-31. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.027. Epub 2014 Jan 28. Review.

PMID:
24491309
15.

The role of MRI in active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Moore CM, Ridout A, Emberton M.

Curr Opin Urol. 2013 May;23(3):261-7. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835f899f. Review.

PMID:
23478498
16.

Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Fenton JJ, Weyrich MS, Durbin S, Liu Y, Bang H, Melnikow J.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 May.

17.

The experience of adults who choose watchful waiting or active surveillance as an approach to medical treatment: a qualitative systematic review.

Rittenmeyer L, Huffman D, Alagna M, Moore E.

JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Feb;14(2):174-255. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2016-2270. Review.

PMID:
27536798
18.

Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: How to Do It Right.

Garisto JD, Klotz L.

Oncology (Williston Park). 2017 May 15;31(5):333-40, 345. Review.

19.

Risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.

Alberts AR, Roobol MJ, Drost FH, van Leenders GJ, Bokhorst LP, Bangma CH, Schoots IG.

BJU Int. 2017 Oct;120(4):511-519. doi: 10.1111/bju.13836. Epub 2017 Apr 4.

20.

Active surveillance for prostate and thyroid cancers: evolution in clinical paradigms and lessons learned.

Lowenstein LM, Basourakos SP, Williams MD, Troncoso P, Gregg JR, Thompson TC, Kim J.

Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2019 Mar;16(3):168-184. doi: 10.1038/s41571-018-0116-x. Review.

PMID:
30413793

Supplemental Content

Support Center