153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29854755)
1. The Impact of Pathologic Upgrading of Gleason Score 7 Prostate Cancer on the Risk of the Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.
Park J; Yoo S; Cho MC; Cho MH; Jeong CW; Ku JH; Kwak C; Kim HH; Jeong H
Biomed Res Int; 2018; 2018():4510149. PubMed ID: 29854755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical and pathologic predictors of Gleason sum upgrading in patients after radical prostatectomy: results from a single institution series.
Tilki D; Schlenker B; John M; Buchner A; Stanislaus P; Gratzke C; Karl A; Tan GY; Ergün S; Tewari AK; Stief CG; Seitz M; Reich O
Urol Oncol; 2011; 29(5):508-14. PubMed ID: 19837614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prostate cancer upgrading or downgrading of biopsy Gleason scores at radical prostatectomy: prediction of "regression to the mean" using routine clinical features with correlating biochemical relapse rates.
Altok M; Troncoso P; Achim MF; Matin SF; Gonzalez GN; Davis JW
Asian J Androl; 2019; 21(6):598-604. PubMed ID: 31115364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prognostic significance of primary Gleason pattern in Japanese men with Gleason score 7 prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy.
Miyake H; Muramaki M; Furukawa J; Tanaka H; Inoue TA; Fujisawa M
Urol Oncol; 2013 Nov; 31(8):1511-6. PubMed ID: 22658882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Outcome after radical prostatectomy with a pretreatment prostate biopsy Gleason score of >/=8.
Manoharan M; Bird VG; Kim SS; Civantos F; Soloway MS
BJU Int; 2003 Oct; 92(6):539-44. PubMed ID: 14511029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Discrepancy between Needle Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Gleason Score in Patients with Prostate Cancer.
Abedi AR; Basiri A; Shakhssalim N; Sadri G; Ahadi M; Hojjati SA; Sheykhzadeh S; Askarpour S; Ghiasy S
Urol J; 2020 Aug; 18(4):395-399. PubMed ID: 32798231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Presence of high grade tertiary Gleason pattern upgrades the Gleason sum score and is inversely associated with biochemical recurrence-free survival.
Turker P; Bas E; Bozkurt S; Günlüsoy B; Sezgin A; Postacı H; Turkeri L
Urol Oncol; 2013 Jan; 31(1):93-8. PubMed ID: 21316989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prostate-specific antigen density predicts extracapsular extension and increased risk of biochemical recurrence in patients with high-risk prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy.
Koie T; Mitsuzuka K; Yoneyama T; Narita S; Kawamura S; Kaiho Y; Tsuchiya N; Tochigi T; Habuchi T; Arai Y; Ohyama C; Yoneyama T; Tobisawa Y
Int J Clin Oncol; 2015 Feb; 20(1):176-81. PubMed ID: 24771079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Stage T1-2 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of factors affecting biochemical and clinical failures after radical prostatectomy.
Kupelian PA; Katcher J; Levin HS; Klein EA
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1997 Mar; 37(5):1043-52. PubMed ID: 9169811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. How significant is upgrade in Gleason score between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology while discussing less invasive treatment options?
Suer E; Gokce MI; Gulpinar O; Guclu AG; Haciyev P; Gogus C; Turkolmez K; Baltaci S
Scand J Urol; 2014 Apr; 48(2):177-82. PubMed ID: 23941315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Tertiary Gleason pattern in radical prostatectomy specimens is associated with worse outcomes than the next higher Gleason score group in localized prostate cancer.
Özsoy M; D'Andrea D; Moschini M; Foerster B; Abufaraj M; Mathieu R; Briganti A; Karakiewicz PI; Roupret M; Seitz C; Czech AK; Susani M; Shariat SF
Urol Oncol; 2018 Apr; 36(4):158.e1-158.e6. PubMed ID: 29288003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Prostate-specific antigen 10-20 ng/mL: A predictor of degree of upgrading to ≥8 among patients with biopsy Gleason score 6.
Santok GD; Abdel Raheem A; Kim LH; Chang K; Lum TG; Chung BH; Choi YD; Rha KH
Investig Clin Urol; 2017 Mar; 58(2):90-97. PubMed ID: 28261677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Clinically predictive factors of Gleason score upgrading in patients after radical prostatectomy].
Zuo Q; Zhang F; Huang Y; Ma LL; Lu M; Lu J
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2016 Aug; 48(4):603-606. PubMed ID: 29263497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does the Gleason Score 7 Upgrading Always Predict Worse Prognosis?
Zhou J; Yu M; Ding J; Qi J
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2023 Dec; 21(6):e412-e421. PubMed ID: 37248147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Grade Groups Provide Improved Predictions of Pathological and Early Oncologic Outcomes Compared with Gleason Score Risk Groups.
Kirmiz S; Qi J; Babitz SK; Linsell S; Denton B; Singh K; Auffenberg G; Montie JE; Lane BR
J Urol; 2019 Feb; 201(2):278-283. PubMed ID: 30195846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prostate biopsy clinical and pathological variables that predict significant grading changes in patients with intermediate and high grade prostate cancer.
Moussa AS; Li J; Soriano M; Klein EA; Dong F; Jones JS
BJU Int; 2009 Jan; 103(1):43-8. PubMed ID: 18782303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Role of prostate health index to predict Gleason score upgrading and high-risk prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens.
Kim H; Jung G; Kim JH; Byun SS; Hong SK
Sci Rep; 2021 Aug; 11(1):17447. PubMed ID: 34465825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Role of PI-RADS Version 2 for Prediction of Upgrading in Biopsy-Proven Prostate Cancer With Gleason Score 6.
Song W; Bang SH; Jeon HG; Jeong BC; Seo SI; Jeon SS; Choi HY; Kim CK; Lee HM
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2018 Aug; 16(4):281-287. PubMed ID: 29550198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Small-volume lymph node involvement and biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with extended lymph node dissection in prostate cancer.
Morizane S; Honda M; Shimizu R; Teraoka S; Nishikawa R; Tsounapi P; Kimura Y; Iwamoto H; Hikita K; Takenaka A
Int J Clin Oncol; 2020 Jul; 25(7):1398-1404. PubMed ID: 32333202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Delay from biopsy to radical prostatectomy influences the rate of adverse pathologic outcomes.
Berg WT; Danzig MR; Pak JS; Korets R; RoyChoudhury A; Hruby G; Benson MC; McKiernan JM; Badani KK
Prostate; 2015 Jul; 75(10):1085-91. PubMed ID: 25809289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
