172 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]
