278 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30248225)
1. Pathological upgrading at radical prostatectomy for patients with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer: implications of confirmatory testing for patients considering active surveillance.
Kaye DR; Qi J; Morgan TM; Linsell S; Ginsburg KB; Lane BR; Montie JE; Cher ML; Miller DC;
BJU Int; 2019 May; 123(5):846-853. PubMed ID: 30248225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Biopsy in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.
Kinnaird A; Yerram NK; O'Connor L; Brisbane W; Sharma V; Chuang R; Jayadevan R; Ahdoot M; Daneshvar M; Priester A; Delfin M; Tran E; Barsa DE; Sisk A; Reiter RE; Felker E; Raman S; Kwan L; Choyke PL; Merino MJ; Wood BJ; Turkbey B; Pinto PA; Marks LS
J Urol; 2022 Apr; 207(4):823-831. PubMed ID: 34854746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Confirmatory Biopsy for Initiating Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.
Jayadevan R; Felker ER; Kwan L; Barsa DE; Zhang H; Sisk AE; Delfin M; Marks LS
JAMA Netw Open; 2019 Sep; 2(9):e1911019. PubMed ID: 31509206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Upgrading on Per Protocol versus For Cause surveillance prostate biopsies: An opportunity to decreasing the burden of active surveillance.
Wang M; Lange A; Perlman D; Qi J; George AK; Ferrante S; Semerjian A; Sarle R; Cher ML; Ginsburg KB;
Prostate; 2023 Sep; 83(12):1141-1149. PubMed ID: 37173808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Selecting Patients with Favorable Risk, Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer for Active Surveillance-Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging Have a Role?
Stonier T; Tin AL; Sjoberg DD; Jibara G; Vickers AJ; Fine S; Eastham J
J Urol; 2021 Apr; 205(4):1063-1068. PubMed ID: 33216696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Impact of Visible Tumor (PI-RADS ≥ 3) on Upgrading and Adverse Pathology at Radical Prostatectomy in Low Risk Prostate Cancer Patients: A Biopsy Core Based Analysis.
Özkan A; Köseoğlu E; Kılıç M; Baydar DE; Sağlıcan Y; Balbay MD; Canda AE; Kordan Y; Kiremit MC; Çil B; Tuğcu V; Bakır B; Esen T
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2022 Feb; 20(1):e61-e67. PubMed ID: 34750082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Outcomes of Grade Group 2 and 3 Prostate Cancer on Initial Versus Confirmatory Biopsy: Implications for Active Surveillance.
Perera M; Jibara G; Tin AL; Haywood S; Sjoberg DD; Benfante NE; Carlsson SV; Eastham JA; Laudone V; Touijer KA; Fine S; Scardino PT; Vickers AJ; Ehdaie B
Eur Urol Focus; 2023 Jul; 9(4):662-668. PubMed ID: 36566100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Grade Group Underestimation in Prostate Biopsy: Predictive Factors and Outcomes in Candidates for Active Surveillance.
Audenet F; Rozet F; Resche-Rigon M; Bernard R; Ingels A; Prapotnich D; Sanchez-Salas R; Galiano M; Barret E; Cathelineau X
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2017 Dec; 15(6):e907-e913. PubMed ID: 28522288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Active Surveillance Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study (ASIST): Results of a Randomized Multicenter Prospective Trial.
Klotz L; Loblaw A; Sugar L; Moussa M; Berman DM; Van der Kwast T; Vesprini D; Milot L; Kebabdjian M; Fleshner N; Ghai S; Chin J; Pond GR; Haider M
Eur Urol; 2019 Feb; 75(2):300-309. PubMed ID: 30017404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Downgrading of grade group 2 intermediate-risk prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: Comparison of outcomes and predictors to identify potential candidates for active surveillance.
Su ZT; Patel HD; Epstein JI; Pavlovich CP; Allaf ME
Cancer; 2020 Apr; 126(8):1632-1639. PubMed ID: 32031685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluating the Safety of Active Surveillance: Outcomes of Deferred Radical Prostatectomy after an Initial Period of Surveillance.
Balakrishnan AS; Cowan JE; Cooperberg MR; Shinohara K; Nguyen HG; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2019 Sep; 202(3):506-510. PubMed ID: 30958738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Intermediate Grade Prostate Cancer and Risk for Adverse Pathology Radical Prostatectomy: Implications for Partial Gland Ablation Case Selection.
Stangl-Kremser J; Patel N; Hu JC
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2023 Aug; 21(4):491-496. PubMed ID: 37246010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A novel nomogram to identify candidates for active surveillance amongst patients with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 1 or ISUP GG2 prostate cancer, according to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings.
Luzzago S; de Cobelli O; Cozzi G; Peveri G; Bagnardi V; Catellani M; Di Trapani E; Mistretta FA; Pricolo P; Conti A; Alessi S; Marvaso G; Ferro M; Matei DV; Renne G; Jereczek-Fossa BA; Petralia G; Musi G
BJU Int; 2020 Jul; 126(1):104-113. PubMed ID: 32150328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluating the Outcomes of Active Surveillance in Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Prospective Results from the Canary PASS Cohort.
Waisman Malaret AJ; Chang P; Zhu K; Zheng Y; Newcomb LF; Liu M; McKenney JK; Brooks JD; Carroll P; Dash A; Filson CP; Gleave ME; Liss M; Martin FM; Morgan TM; Nelson PS; Lin DW; Wagner AA
J Urol; 2022 Apr; 207(4):805-813. PubMed ID: 34854745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Confirmatory Magnetic Resonance Imaging with or without Biopsy Impacts Decision Making in Newly Diagnosed Favorable Risk Prostate Cancer.
Ginsburg KB; Arcot R; Qi J; Linsell SM; Kaye DR; George AK; Cher ML;
J Urol; 2019 May; 201(5):923-928. PubMed ID: 30694939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prostate Cancer Genomic Classifier Relates More Strongly to Gleason Grade Group Than Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Score in Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsies.
Martin DT; Ghabili K; Levi A; Humphrey PA; Sprenkle PC
Urology; 2019 Mar; 125():64-72. PubMed ID: 30552940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Population based study of predictors of adverse pathology among candidates for active surveillance with Gleason 6 prostate cancer.
Vellekoop A; Loeb S; Folkvaljon Y; Stattin P
J Urol; 2014 Feb; 191(2):350-7. PubMed ID: 24071481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Questioning the Status Quo: Should Gleason Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer be Considered a "Negative Core" in Pre-Radical Prostatectomy Risk Nomograms? An International Multicenter Analysis.
Leong JY; Herrera-Caceres JO; Goldberg H; Tham E; Teplitsky S; Gomella LG; Trabulsi EJ; Lallas CD; Fleshner NE; Tilki D; Chandrasekar T
Urology; 2020 Mar; 137():102-107. PubMed ID: 31705947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.
Alberts AR; Roobol MJ; Drost FH; van Leenders GJ; Bokhorst LP; Bangma CH; Schoots IG
BJU Int; 2017 Oct; 120(4):511-519. PubMed ID: 28267899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Combined MRI-targeted Plus Systematic Confirmatory Biopsy Improves Risk Stratification for Patients Enrolling on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.
O'Connor LP; Wang AZ; Yerram NK; Lebastchi AH; Ahdoot M; Gurram S; Zeng J; Mehralivand S; Harmon S; Merino MJ; Parnes HL; Choyke PL; Turkbey B; Wood BJ; Pinto PA
Urology; 2020 Oct; 144():164-170. PubMed ID: 32679272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
