425 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16462155)
21. Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma in needle biopsies vs. radical prostatectomy specimens.
Mazzucchelli R; Barbisan F; Tarquini LM; Filosa A; Campanini N; Galosi AB
Anal Quant Cytol Histol; 2005 Jun; 27(3):125-33. PubMed ID: 16121633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Current perspectives on the Gleason grading of prostate cancer.
Shah RB
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2009 Nov; 133(11):1810-6. PubMed ID: 19886716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate in Iceland: a population-based study of stage, Gleason grade, treatment and long-term survival in males diagnosed between 1983 and 1987.
Jonsson E; Sigbjarnarson HP; Tomasson J; Benediktsdottir KR; Tryggvadottir L; Hrafnkelsson J; Olafsdottir EJ; Tulinius H; Jonasson JG
Scand J Urol Nephrol; 2006; 40(4):265-71. PubMed ID: 16916765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparative study between prostatic carcinoma G1-G3 and Gleason grading systems.
Zaharia B; Pleşea IE; Enache SD; Tomescu P; Panuş A; Pop OT; Badea P; Kozokić A
Rom J Morphol Embryol; 1999-2004; 45():185-97. PubMed ID: 15847394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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;
Am J Surg Pathol; 2016 Feb; 40(2):244-52. PubMed ID: 26492179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Validation of Partin tables and development of a preoperative nomogram for Japanese patients with clinically localized prostate cancer using 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology consensus on Gleason grading: data from the Clinicopathological Research Group for Localized Prostate Cancer.
Naito S; Kuroiwa K; Kinukawa N; Goto K; Koga H; Ogawa O; Murai M; Shiraishi T;
J Urol; 2008 Sep; 180(3):904-9; discussion 909-10. PubMed ID: 18635221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Tertiary Gleason pattern 5 is a powerful predictor of biochemical relapse in patients with Gleason score 7 prostatic adenocarcinoma.
Hattab EM; Koch MO; Eble JN; Lin H; Cheng L
J Urol; 2006 May; 175(5):1695-9; discussion 1699. PubMed ID: 16600733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Usefulness of the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Grading System in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.
Trpkov K; Zhang J
BJU Int; 2009 Sep; 104(5):722-3. PubMed ID: 19689580
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Impact of increased number of biopsies on the nature of prostate cancer identified.
Meng MV; Elkin EP; DuChane J; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2006 Jul; 176(1):63-8; discussion 69. PubMed ID: 16753368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Prostate cancer with tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in prostate needle biopsy: clinicopathologic findings and disease progression.
Trpkov K; Zhang J; Chan M; Eigl BJ; Yilmaz A
Am J Surg Pathol; 2009 Feb; 33(2):233-40. PubMed ID: 18936690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes.
Cookson MS; Aus G; Burnett AL; Canby-Hagino ED; D'Amico AV; Dmochowski RR; Eton DT; Forman JD; Goldenberg SL; Hernandez J; Higano CS; Kraus SR; Moul JW; Tangen C; Thrasher JB; Thompson I
J Urol; 2007 Feb; 177(2):540-5. PubMed ID: 17222629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Prostate cancers scored as Gleason 6 on prostate biopsy are frequently Gleason 7 tumors at radical prostatectomy: implication on outcome.
Pinthus JH; Witkos M; Fleshner NE; Sweet J; Evans A; Jewett MA; Krahn M; Alibhai S; Trachtenberg J
J Urol; 2006 Sep; 176(3):979-84; discussion 984. PubMed ID: 16890675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study.
Kvåle R; Møller B; Wahlqvist R; Fosså SD; Berner A; Busch C; Kyrdalen AE; Svindland A; Viset T; Halvorsen OJ
BJU Int; 2009 Jun; 103(12):1647-54. PubMed ID: 19154461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Clinical and pathologic outcome after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients with a preoperative Gleason sum of 8 to 10.
Bastian PJ; Gonzalgo ML; Aronson WJ; Terris MK; Kane CJ; Amling CL; Presti JC; Mangold LA; Humphreys E; Epstein JI; Partin AW; Freedland SJ
Cancer; 2006 Sep; 107(6):1265-72. PubMed ID: 16900523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Should we replace the Gleason score with the amount of high-grade prostate cancer?
Vis AN; Roemeling S; Kranse R; Schröder FH; van der Kwast TH
Eur Urol; 2007 Apr; 51(4):931-9. PubMed ID: 16935413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A pathological reassessment of organ-confined, Gleason score 6 prostatic adenocarcinomas that progress after radical prostatectomy.
Miyamoto H; Hernandez DJ; Epstein JI
Hum Pathol; 2009 Dec; 40(12):1693-8. PubMed ID: 19683331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Improved accuracy for predicting the Gleason score of prostate cancer by increasing the number of transrectal biopsy cores.
Miyake H; Kurahashi T; Takenaka A; Hara I; Fujisawa M
Urol Int; 2007; 79(4):302-6. PubMed ID: 18025846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. A contemporary update on pathology reporting for prostate cancer: biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.
Fine SW; Amin MB; Berney DM; Bjartell A; Egevad L; Epstein JI; Humphrey PA; Magi-Galluzzi C; Montironi R; Stief C
Eur Urol; 2012 Jul; 62(1):20-39. PubMed ID: 22421083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Pathological features after radical prostatectomy in potential candidates for active monitoring.
Griffin CR; Yu X; Loeb S; Desireddi VN; Han M; Graif T; Catalona WJ
J Urol; 2007 Sep; 178(3 Pt 1):860-3; discussion 863. PubMed ID: 17631347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Conventional assessment of needle biopsy specimens is more useful than digital image analysis of proliferation and DNA ploidy in prediction of positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy.
Sengupta S; Cheville JC; Lohse CM; Zincke H; Myers RP; Riehle DL; Pankratz VS; Blute ML; Sebo TJ
Urology; 2006 Jul; 68(1):94-8. PubMed ID: 16844452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
