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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23621751)

  • 1. Why prostate tumour delineation based on apparent diffusion coefficient is challenging: an exploration of the tissue microanatomy.
    Borren A; Moman MR; Groenendaal G; Boeken Kruger AE; van Diest PJ; van der Groep P; van der Heide UA; van Vulpen M; Philippens ME
    Acta Oncol; 2013 Nov; 52(8):1629-36. PubMed ID: 23621751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accurate prostate tumour detection with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: dependence on histological properties.
    Borren A; Groenendaal G; Moman MR; Boeken Kruger AE; van Diest PJ; van Vulpen M; Philippens ME; van der Heide UA
    Acta Oncol; 2014 Jan; 53(1):88-95. PubMed ID: 24041257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Differentiation of central gland prostate cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia using monoexponential and biexponential diffusion-weighted imaging.
    Liu X; Zhou L; Peng W; Wang C; Wang H
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2013 Oct; 31(8):1318-24. PubMed ID: 23791546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative MR parameters with Gleason score and tumor angiogenesis.
    Oto A; Yang C; Kayhan A; Tretiakova M; Antic T; Schmid-Tannwald C; Eggener S; Karczmar GS; Stadler WM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Dec; 197(6):1382-90. PubMed ID: 22109293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessment of aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with histologic grade after radical prostatectomy.
    Verma S; Rajesh A; Morales H; Lemen L; Bills G; Delworth M; Gaitonde K; Ying J; Samartunga R; Lamba M
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):374-81. PubMed ID: 21257890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Correlation of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance data with cellularity in prostate cancer.
    Zelhof B; Pickles M; Liney G; Gibbs P; Rodrigues G; Kraus S; Turnbull L
    BJU Int; 2009 Apr; 103(7):883-8. PubMed ID: 19007373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Initial experience with identifying high-grade prostate cancer using diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) in patients with a Gleason score ≤ 3 + 3 = 6 upon schematic TRUS-guided biopsy: a radical prostatectomy correlated series.
    Somford DM; Hambrock T; Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA; Fütterer JJ; van Oort IM; van Basten JP; Karthaus HF; Witjes JA; Barentsz JO
    Invest Radiol; 2012 Mar; 47(3):153-8. PubMed ID: 22293513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Prostate cancer: comparison of tumor visibility on trace diffusion-weighted images and the apparent diffusion coefficient map.
    Rosenkrantz AB; Kong X; Niver BE; Berkman DS; Melamed J; Babb JS; Taneja SS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jan; 196(1):123-9. PubMed ID: 21178056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Diffusion kurtosis imaging study of prostate cancer: preliminary findings.
    Tamura C; Shinmoto H; Soga S; Okamura T; Sato H; Okuaki T; Pang Y; Kosuda S; Kaji T
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 Sep; 40(3):723-9. PubMed ID: 24924835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values of the Benign Central Zone of the Prostate: Comparison With Low- and High-Grade Prostate Cancer.
    Gupta RT; Kauffman CR; Garcia-Reyes K; Palmeri ML; Madden JF; Polascik TJ; Rosenkrantz AB
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Aug; 205(2):331-6. PubMed ID: 26204283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features.
    Langer DL; van der Kwast TH; Evans AJ; Plotkin A; Trachtenberg J; Wilson BC; Haider MA
    Radiology; 2010 May; 255(2):485-94. PubMed ID: 20413761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer.
    Manenti G; Carlani M; Mancino S; Colangelo V; Di Roma M; Squillaci E; Simonetti G
    Invest Radiol; 2007 Jun; 42(6):412-9. PubMed ID: 17507813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Apparent diffusion coefficient value and ratio as noninvasive potential biomarkers to predict prostate cancer grading: comparison with prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen.
    De Cobelli F; Ravelli S; Esposito A; Giganti F; Gallina A; Montorsi F; Del Maschio A
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Mar; 204(3):550-7. PubMed ID: 25714284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The ability of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density to predict an upgrade in Gleason score between initial prostate biopsy and prostatectomy diminishes with increasing tumour grade due to reduced PSA secretion per unit tumour volume.
    Corcoran NM; Casey RG; Hong MK; Pedersen J; Connolly S; Peters J; Harewood L; Gleave ME; Costello AJ; Hovens CM; Goldenberg SL
    BJU Int; 2012 Jul; 110(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 22085203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Does normalisation improve the diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient values for prostate cancer assessment? A blinded independent-observer evaluation.
    Rosenkrantz AB; Khalef V; Xu W; Babb JS; Taneja SS; Doshi AM
    Clin Radiol; 2015 Sep; 70(9):1032-7. PubMed ID: 26126712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer.
    Hambrock T; Somford DM; Huisman HJ; van Oort IM; Witjes JA; Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA; Scheenen T; Barentsz JO
    Radiology; 2011 May; 259(2):453-61. PubMed ID: 21502392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Exponential apparent diffusion coefficient in evaluating prostate cancer at 3 T: preliminary experience.
    Park SY; Kim CK; Park JJ; Park BK
    Br J Radiol; 2016; 89(1058):20150470. PubMed ID: 26653866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Correlation of ADC and T2 measurements with cell density in prostate cancer at 3.0 Tesla.
    Gibbs P; Liney GP; Pickles MD; Zelhof B; Rodrigues G; Turnbull LW
    Invest Radiol; 2009 Sep; 44(9):572-6. PubMed ID: 19692841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Underestimation of Gleason score at prostate biopsy reflects sampling error in lower volume tumours.
    Corcoran NM; Hovens CM; Hong MK; Pedersen J; Casey RG; Connolly S; Peters J; Harewood L; Gleave ME; Goldenberg SL; Costello AJ
    BJU Int; 2012 Mar; 109(5):660-4. PubMed ID: 21895937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2--sparse versus dense cancers.
    Langer DL; van der Kwast TH; Evans AJ; Sun L; Yaffe MJ; Trachtenberg J; Haider MA
    Radiology; 2008 Dec; 249(3):900-8. PubMed ID: 19011187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.