Similar articles for PMID: 31868968

Year	Number of Results
1883	1
1978	1
1994	1
1998	1
1999	1
2001	1
2002	1
2004	1
2006	1
2007	3
2008	5
2009	2
2010	3
2011	9
2012	8
2013	10
2014	9
2015	12
2016	28
2017	20
2018	9
2019	20
2020	15
2021	11
2022	8
2023	3
2024	0

1

Automated approach for estimation of grade groups for prostate cancer based on histological image feature analysis.

Hossain A, Arimura H, Kinoshita F, Ninomiya K, Watanabe S, Imada K, Koyanagi R, Oda Y. Hossain A, et al. Prostate. 2020 Feb;80(3):291-302. doi: 10.1002/pros.23943. Epub 2019 Dec 23. Prostate. 2020. PMID: 31868968

2

Contemporary Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: An Update With Discussion on Practical Issues to Implement the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VE, Humphrey PA. Epstein JI, et al. Am J Surg Pathol. 2017 Apr;41(4):e1-e7. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000820. Am J Surg Pathol. 2017. PMID: 28177964

3

SOCS3 Immunohistochemical Expression Seems to Support the 2005 and 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Modified Gleason Grading System.

Pierconti F, Martini M, Cenci T, Petrone GL, Ricci R, Sacco E, Bassi PF, Larocca LM. Pierconti F, et al. Prostate. 2017 May;77(6):597-603. doi: 10.1002/pros.23299. Epub 2017 Feb 1. Prostate. 2017. PMID: 28144985

4

Can Extraprostatic Extension Be Predicted by Tumor-Capsule Contact Length in Prostate Cancer? Relationship With International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Groups.

Bakir B, Onay A, Vural M, Armutlu A, Yıldız SÖ, Esen T. Bakir B, et al. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Mar;214(3):588-596. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21828. Epub 2019 Oct 31. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020. PMID: 31670596

5

The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.

Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA; Grading Committee. Epstein JI, et al. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016 Feb;40(2):244-52. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016. PMID: 26492179 Review.

6

Biparametric Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version2 and International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Predict Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.

Takeuchi N, Sakamoto S, Nishiyama A, Horikoshi T, Yamada Y, Iizuka J, Maimaiti M, Imamura Y, Kawamura K, Imamoto T, Komiya A, Ikehara Y, Akakura K, Ichikawa T. Takeuchi N, et al. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018 Aug;16(4):e817-e829. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2018.02.011. Epub 2018 Feb 24. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018. PMID: 29576444

7

Accuracy of prostate biopsies for predicting Gleason score in radical prostatectomy specimens: nationwide trends 2000-2012.

Danneman D, Drevin L, Delahunt B, Samaratunga H, Robinson D, Bratt O, Loeb S, Stattin P, Egevad L. Danneman D, et al. BJU Int. 2017 Jan;119(1):50-56. doi: 10.1111/bju.13458. Epub 2016 Mar 24. BJU Int. 2017. PMID: 26918298

8

Predictive value of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology grading system for prostate cancer in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy with long-term follow-up.

Grogan J, Gupta R, Mahon KL, Stricker PD, Haynes AM, Delprado W, Turner J, Horvath LG, Kench JG. Grogan J, et al. BJU Int. 2017 Nov;120(5):651-658. doi: 10.1111/bju.13857. Epub 2017 Apr 30. BJU Int. 2017. PMID: 28371244

9

Controversial issues in Gleason and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) prostate cancer grading: proposed recommendations for international implementation.

Srigley JR, Delahunt B, Samaratunga H, Billis A, Cheng L, Clouston D, Evans A, Furusato B, Kench J, Leite K, MacLennan G, Moch H, Pan CC, Rioux-Leclercq N, Ro J, Shanks J, Shen S, Tsuzuki T, Varma M, Wheeler T, Yaxley J, Egevad L. Srigley JR, et al. Pathology. 2019 Aug;51(5):463-473. doi: 10.1016/j.pathol.2019.05.001. Epub 2019 Jul 3. Pathology. 2019. PMID: 31279442 Free article. Review.

10

An artificial intelligence algorithm for prostate cancer diagnosis in whole slide images of core needle biopsies: a blinded clinical validation and deployment study.

Pantanowitz L, Quiroga-Garza GM, Bien L, Heled R, Laifenfeld D, Linhart C, Sandbank J, Albrecht Shach A, Shalev V, Vecsler M, Michelow P, Hazelhurst S, Dhir R. Pantanowitz L, et al. Lancet Digit Health. 2020 Aug;2(8):e407-e416. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30159-X. Lancet Digit Health. 2020. PMID: 33328045 Free article.

Save citations to file

Email citations

Send citations to clipboard

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Create a file for external citation management software

Your saved search

Your RSS Feed

My NCBI Filters

Results by year

Text availability

Article attribute

Article type

Publication date

157 results

Results by year