These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21944097)

  • 1. A new preoperative nomogram to predict minimal prostate cancer: accuracy and error rates compared to other tools to select patients for active surveillance.
    O'Brien BA; Cohen RJ; Ryan A; Sengupta S; Mills J
    J Urol; 2011 Nov; 186(5):1811-7. PubMed ID: 21944097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A nomogram for predicting low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer: a tool in selecting patients for active surveillance.
    Nakanishi H; Wang X; Ochiai A; Trpkov K; Yilmaz A; Donnelly JB; Davis JW; Troncoso P; Babaian RJ
    Cancer; 2007 Dec; 110(11):2441-7. PubMed ID: 17932909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer.
    Cagiannos I; Karakiewicz P; Eastham JA; Ohori M; Rabbani F; Gerigk C; Reuter V; Graefen M; Hammerer PG; Erbersdobler A; Huland H; Kupelian P; Klein E; Quinn DI; Henshall SM; Grygiel JJ; Sutherland RL; Stricker PD; Morash CG; Scardino PT; Kattan MW
    J Urol; 2003 Nov; 170(5):1798-803. PubMed ID: 14532779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Critical assessment of tools to predict clinically insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in contemporary men.
    Chun FK; Haese A; Ahyai SA; Walz J; Suardi N; Capitanio U; Graefen M; Erbersdobler A; Huland H; Karakiewicz PI
    Cancer; 2008 Aug; 113(4):701-9. PubMed ID: 18553365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Pathological and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk prostate cancer meeting the Prostate Cancer International: Active Surveillance criteria.
    Mitsuzuka K; Narita S; Koie T; Kaiho Y; Tsuchiya N; Yoneyama T; Kakoi N; Kawamura S; Tochigi T; Habuchi T; Ohyama C; Arai Y
    BJU Int; 2013 May; 111(6):914-20. PubMed ID: 23320782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Pathologic prostate cancer characteristics in patients eligible for active surveillance: a head-to-head comparison of contemporary protocols.
    Iremashvili V; Pelaez L; Manoharan M; Jorda M; Rosenberg DL; Soloway MS
    Eur Urol; 2012 Sep; 62(3):462-8. PubMed ID: 22445138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparative analysis of three risk assessment tools in Australian patients with prostate cancer.
    Tamblyn DJ; Chopra S; Yu C; Kattan MW; Pinnock C; Kopsaftis T
    BJU Int; 2011 Nov; 108 Suppl 2():51-6. PubMed ID: 22085129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Nomogram predicting the probability of early recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.
    Walz J; Chun FK; Klein EA; Reuther A; Saad F; Graefen M; Huland H; Karakiewicz PI
    J Urol; 2009 Feb; 181(2):601-7; discussion 607-8. PubMed ID: 19084864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Factors predicting prostatic biopsy Gleason sum under grading.
    Stackhouse DA; Sun L; Schroeck FR; Jayachandran J; Caire AA; Acholo CO; Robertson CN; Albala DM; Polascik TJ; Donatucci CF; Maloney KE; Moul JW
    J Urol; 2009 Jul; 182(1):118-22; discussion 123-4. PubMed ID: 19447436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Identifying the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among patients with high-risk prostate cancer.
    Briganti A; Joniau S; Gontero P; Abdollah F; Passoni NM; Tombal B; Marchioro G; Kneitz B; Walz J; Frohneberg D; Bangma CH; Graefen M; Tizzani A; Frea B; Karnes RJ; Montorsi F; Van Poppel H; Spahn M
    Eur Urol; 2012 Mar; 61(3):584-92. PubMed ID: 22153925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. How well does the Partin nomogram predict pathological stage after radical prostatectomy in a community based population? Results of the cancer of the prostate strategic urological research endeavor.
    Penson DF; Grossfeld GD; Li YP; Henning JM; Lubeck DP; Carroll PR
    J Urol; 2002 Apr; 167(4):1653-7; discussion 1657-8. PubMed ID: 11912382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical predictors of Gleason score upgrading: implications for patients considering watchful waiting, active surveillance, or brachytherapy.
    Kulkarni GS; Lockwood G; Evans A; Toi A; Trachtenberg J; Jewett MA; Finelli A; Fleshner NE
    Cancer; 2007 Jun; 109(12):2432-8. PubMed ID: 17497649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores.
    Briganti A; Larcher A; Abdollah F; Capitanio U; Gallina A; Suardi N; Bianchi M; Sun M; Freschi M; Salonia A; Karakiewicz PI; Rigatti P; Montorsi F
    Eur Urol; 2012 Mar; 61(3):480-7. PubMed ID: 22078338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Unilateral positive biopsies in low risk prostate cancer patients diagnosed with extended transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy schemes do not predict unilateral prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy.
    Gallina A; Maccagnano C; Suardi N; Capitanio U; Abdollah F; Raber M; Salonia A; Scattoni V; Rigatti P; Montorsi F; Briganti A
    BJU Int; 2012 Jul; 110(2 Pt 2):E64-8. PubMed ID: 22093108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of pathological outcomes of active surveillance candidates who underwent radical prostatectomy using contemporary protocols at a high-volume Korean center.
    Lee DH; Jung HB; Lee SH; Rha KH; Choi YD; Hong SJ; Yang SC; Chung BH
    Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2012 Nov; 42(11):1079-85. PubMed ID: 22988037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. External validation of the updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection.
    Gacci M; Schiavina R; Lanciotti M; Masieri L; Serni S; Vagnoni V; Abdollah F; Carini M; Martorana G; Montorsi F
    Urol Int; 2013; 90(3):277-82. PubMed ID: 23296120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Pathological stage distribution in patients treated with radical prostatectomy reflecting the need for protocol-based active surveillance: results from a contemporary European patient cohort.
    Seiler D; Randazzo M; Klotz L; Grobholz R; Baumgartner M; Isbarn H; Recker F; Kwiatkowski M
    BJU Int; 2012 Jul; 110(2):195-200. PubMed ID: 22093744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Preoperative serum prostate specific antigen does not reflect biochemical failure rates after radical prostatectomy in men with large volume cancers.
    Noguchi M; Stamey TA; McNeal JE; Yemoto CM
    J Urol; 2000 Nov; 164(5):1596-600. PubMed ID: 11025712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The addition of interleukin-6 soluble receptor and transforming growth factor beta1 improves a preoperative nomogram for predicting biochemical progression in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.
    Kattan MW; Shariat SF; Andrews B; Zhu K; Canto E; Matsumoto K; Muramoto M; Scardino PT; Ohori M; Wheeler TM; Slawin KM
    J Clin Oncol; 2003 Oct; 21(19):3573-9. PubMed ID: 12913106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.