202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30200929)
1. The Terry Fox Research Institute Canadian Prostate Cancer Biomarker Network: an analysis of a pan-Canadian multi-center cohort for biomarker validation.
Ouellet V; Aprikian A; Bergeron A; Brimo F; Bristow RG; Chevalier S; Drachenberg D; Fazli L; Fleshner NE; Gleave M; Karakiewicz P; Klotz L; Lacombe L; Lattouf JB; van der Kwast T; Squire JA; Latour M; Trudel D; Mes-Masson AM; Saad F
BMC Urol; 2018 Sep; 18(1):78. PubMed ID: 30200929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Validation of the prognostic value of NF-κB p65 in prostate cancer: A retrospective study using a large multi-institutional cohort of the Canadian Prostate Cancer Biomarker Network.
Grosset AA; Ouellet V; Caron C; Fragoso G; Barrès V; Delvoye N; Latour M; Aprikian A; Bergeron A; Chevalier S; Fazli L; Fleshner N; Gleave M; Karakiewicz P; Lacombe L; Lattouf JB; van der Kwast T; Trudel D; Mes-Masson AM; Saad F;
PLoS Med; 2019 Jul; 16(7):e1002847. PubMed ID: 31265453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. New Prostate Cancer Grading System Predicts Long-term Survival Following Surgery for Gleason Score 8-10 Prostate Cancer.
Ham WS; Chalfin HJ; Feng Z; Trock BJ; Epstein JI; Cheung C; Humphreys E; Partin AW; Han M
Eur Urol; 2017 Jun; 71(6):907-912. PubMed ID: 27876305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Validation of lymphovascular invasion is an independent prognostic factor for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.
Fajkovic H; Mathieu R; Lucca I; Hiess M; Hübner N; Al Hussein Al Awamlh B; Lee R; Briganti A; Karakiewicz P; Lotan Y; Roupret M; Rink M; Kluth L; Loidl W; Seitz C; Klatte T; Kramer G; Susani M; Shariat SF
Urol Oncol; 2016 May; 34(5):233.e1-6. PubMed ID: 26973136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cysteine-rich secretory protein 3 and β-microseminoprotein on prostate cancer needle biopsies do not have predictive value for subsequent prostatectomy outcome.
Hoogland AM; Dahlman A; Vissers KJ; Wolters T; Schröder FH; Roobol MJ; Bjartell AS; van Leenders GJ
BJU Int; 2011 Oct; 108(8):1356-62. PubMed ID: 21410630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Revised Gleason grading system is a better predictor of indolent prostate cancer at the time of diagnosis: retrospective clinical-pathological study on matched biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.
Giunchi F; Brunocilla E; Borghesi M; Rizzi S; Ricci MS; Romagnoli D; Martorana G; Schiavina R; Fiorentino M
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2014 Oct; 12(5):325-9. PubMed ID: 24583160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Patient-Level DNA Damage and Repair Pathway Profiles and Prognosis After Prostatectomy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer.
Evans JR; Zhao SG; Chang SL; Tomlins SA; Erho N; Sboner A; Schiewer MJ; Spratt DE; Kothari V; Klein EA; Den RB; Dicker AP; Karnes RJ; Yu X; Nguyen PL; Rubin MA; de Bono J; Knudsen KE; Davicioni E; Feng FY
JAMA Oncol; 2016 Apr; 2(4):471-80. PubMed ID: 26746117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Tissue-based Genomics Augments Post-prostatectomy Risk Stratification in a Natural History Cohort of Intermediate- and High-Risk Men.
Ross AE; Johnson MH; Yousefi K; Davicioni E; Netto GJ; Marchionni L; Fedor HL; Glavaris S; Choeurng V; Buerki C; Erho N; Lam LL; Humphreys EB; Faraj S; Bezerra SM; Han M; Partin AW; Trock BJ; Schaeffer EM
Eur Urol; 2016 Jan; 69(1):157-65. PubMed ID: 26058959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Radical prostatectomy represents an effective treatment in patients with specimen-confined high pathological Gleason score prostate cancer.
Lughezzani G; Gallina A; Larcher A; Briganti A; Capitanio U; Suardi N; Lista G; Abrate A; Sangalli MN; Buffi N; Cestari A; Guazzoni G; Rigatti P; Montorsi F
BJU Int; 2013 May; 111(5):723-30. PubMed ID: 22487441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Identification of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate on tissue specimens using Raman micro-spectroscopy: A diagnostic accuracy case-control study with multicohort validation.
Grosset AA; Dallaire F; Nguyen T; Birlea M; Wong J; Daoust F; Roy N; Kougioumoutzakis A; Azzi F; Aubertin K; Kadoury S; Latour M; Albadine R; Prendeville S; Boutros P; Fraser M; Bristow RG; van der Kwast T; Orain M; Brisson H; Benzerdjeb N; Hovington H; Bergeron A; Fradet Y; Têtu B; Saad F; Leblond F; Trudel D
PLoS Med; 2020 Aug; 17(8):e1003281. PubMed ID: 32797086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Characteristics and outcome of the COEUR Canadian validation cohort for ovarian cancer biomarkers.
Le Page C; Rahimi K; Köbel M; Tonin PN; Meunier L; Portelance L; Bernard M; Nelson BH; Bernardini MQ; Bartlett JMS; Bachvarov D; Gotlieb WH; Gilks B; McAlpine JN; Nachtigal MW; Piché A; Watson PH; Vanderhyden B; Huntsman DG; Provencher DM; Mes-Masson AM
BMC Cancer; 2018 Mar; 18(1):347. PubMed ID: 29587661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A genomic classifier improves prediction of metastatic disease within 5 years after surgery in node-negative high-risk prostate cancer patients managed by radical prostatectomy without adjuvant therapy.
Klein EA; Yousefi K; Haddad Z; Choeurng V; Buerki C; Stephenson AJ; Li J; Kattan MW; Magi-Galluzzi C; Davicioni E
Eur Urol; 2015 Apr; 67(4):778-86. PubMed ID: 25466945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The quantitative Gleason score improves prostate cancer risk assessment.
Reese AC; Cowan JE; Brajtbord JS; Harris CR; Carroll PR; Cooperberg MR
Cancer; 2012 Dec; 118(24):6046-54. PubMed ID: 22674220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Overexpression of high mobility group box 1 with poor prognosis in patients after radical prostatectomy.
Li T; Gui Y; Yuan T; Liao G; Bian C; Jiang Q; Huang S; Liu B; Wu D
BJU Int; 2012 Dec; 110(11 Pt C):E1125-30. PubMed ID: 22672360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of pathologic revision and Ki67 and ERG immunohistochemistry on predicting radical prostatectomy outcome in men initially on active surveillance.
Bokhorst LP; Roobol MJ; Bangma CH; van Leenders GJ
Prostate; 2017 Jul; 77(10):1137-1143. PubMed ID: 28543353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Use of two gene panels for prostate cancer diagnosis and patient risk stratification.
Xiao K; Guo J; Zhang X; Feng X; Zhang H; Cheng Z; Johnson H; Persson JL; Chen L
Tumour Biol; 2016 Aug; 37(8):10115-22. PubMed ID: 26820133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Novel diagnostic and prognostic classifiers for prostate cancer identified by genome-wide microRNA profiling.
Kristensen H; Thomsen AR; Haldrup C; Dyrskjøt L; Høyer S; Borre M; Mouritzen P; Ørntoft TF; Sørensen KD
Oncotarget; 2016 May; 7(21):30760-71. PubMed ID: 27120795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Outcomes of Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer with minimal amounts (<6%) vs ≥6% of Gleason pattern 4 tissue in needle biopsy specimens.
Kır G; Seneldir H; Gumus E
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2016 Feb; 20():48-51. PubMed ID: 26750655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Blinded review of archival radical prostatectomy specimens supports that contemporary Gleason score 6 prostate cancer lacks metastatic potential.
Nunez Bragayrac LA; Murekeyisoni C; Vacchio MJ; Attwood K; Mehedint DC; Mohler JL; Azabdaftari G; Xu B; Kauffman EC
Prostate; 2017 Jul; 77(10):1076-1081. PubMed ID: 28547760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comprehensive Evaluation of TFF3 Promoter Hypomethylation and Molecular Biomarker Potential for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis.
Nørgaard M; Haldrup C; Storebjerg TM; Vestergaard EM; Wild PJ; Høyer S; Borre M; Ørntoft TF; Sørensen KD
Int J Mol Sci; 2017 Sep; 18(9):. PubMed ID: 28930171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
