155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30551692)
21. Prostate cancer: from Gleason scoring to prognostic grade grouping.
Montironi R; Santoni M; Mazzucchelli R; Burattini L; Berardi R; Galosi AB; Cheng L; Lopez-Beltran A; Briganti A; Montorsi F; Scarpelli M
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther; 2016; 16(4):433-40. PubMed ID: 27008205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is an independent predictor of outcome after radical prostatectomy.
Pierorazio PM; Lambert SM; Matsukhani M; Sprenkle PC; McCann TR; Katz AE; Olsson CA; Benson MC; McKiernan JM
BJU Int; 2007 Nov; 100(5):1066-70. PubMed ID: 17784880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: is the prognostic difference in Gleason scores 4 + 3 and 3 + 4 independent of the number of involved cores?
Makarov DV; Sanderson H; Partin AW; Epstein JI
J Urol; 2002 Jun; 167(6):2440-2. PubMed ID: 11992053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Prognostic influence of the third Gleason grade in prostatectomy specimens.
Cedeño Díaz OM; Fernández Aceñero MJ; Alvarez Fernández E
Urol Oncol; 2012; 30(4):386-90. PubMed ID: 21292510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Prognostic significance of preoperative factors in localized prostate carcinoma treated with radical prostatectomy: importance of percentage of biopsies that contain tumor and the presence of biopsy perineural invasion.
Quinn DI; Henshall SM; Brenner PC; Kooner R; Golovsky D; O'Neill GF; Turner JJ; Delprado W; Grygiel JJ; Sutherland RL; Stricker PD
Cancer; 2003 Apr; 97(8):1884-93. PubMed ID: 12673714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The impact of the 2005 international society of urological pathology consensus conference on standard Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in needle biopsies.
Billis A; Guimaraes MS; Freitas LL; Meirelles L; Magna LA; Ferreira U
J Urol; 2008 Aug; 180(2):548-52; discussion 552-3. PubMed ID: 18550106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Prediction of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer based on needle biopsy findings: perineural invasion lacks significance on multivariate analysis.
Egan AJ; Bostwick DG
Am J Surg Pathol; 1997 Dec; 21(12):1496-500. PubMed ID: 9414194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Clinical and pathological significance of the level and extent of capsular invasion in clinical stage T1-2 prostate cancer.
Wheeler TM; Dillioglugil O; Kattan MW; Arakawa A; Soh S; Suyama K; Ohori M; Scardino PT
Hum Pathol; 1998 Aug; 29(8):856-62. PubMed ID: 9712429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Should we replace the Gleason score with the amount of high-grade prostate cancer?
Vis AN; Roemeling S; Kranse R; Schröder FH; van der Kwast TH
Eur Urol; 2007 Apr; 51(4):931-9. PubMed ID: 16935413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Oncological Outcomes After Radical Prostatectomy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer Based on New Gleason Grouping System: A Validation Study From University of Southern California With 3,755 Cases.
Djaladat H; Amini E; Xu W; Cai J; Daneshmand S; Lieskovsky G
Prostate; 2017 May; 77(7):743-748. PubMed ID: 28144967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The prognostic importance of Gleason grade in prostatic adenocarcinoma: a long-term follow-up study of 648 patients treated with radiation therapy.
Zagars GK; Ayala AG; von Eschenbach AC; Pollack A
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1995 Jan; 31(2):237-45. PubMed ID: 7836075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Presence or absence of a positive pathological margin outperforms any other margin-associated variable in predicting clinically relevant biochemical recurrence in Gleason 7 prostate cancer.
Huang JG; Pedersen J; Hong MK; Harewood LM; Peters J; Costello AJ; Hovens CM; Corcoran NM
BJU Int; 2013 May; 111(6):921-7. PubMed ID: 23350712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. [Recurrence following radical surgery for prostatic cancer. Analysis of clinical, biological and anatomo-pathological prognostic factors].
Feyaerts A; Delrée A; Lorge F; Opsomer RJ; Wese FX; Van Cangh PJ; Draguet AP; Cosyns JP
Acta Urol Belg; 1997 Mar; 65(1):11-8. PubMed ID: 9245198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies.
Bostwick DG
Am J Surg Pathol; 1994 Aug; 18(8):796-803. PubMed ID: 8037294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Outcome of Gleason 3 + 5 = 8 Prostate Cancer Diagnosed on Needle Biopsy: Prognostic Comparison with Gleason 4 + 4 = 8.
Harding-Jackson N; Kryvenko ON; Whittington EE; Eastwood DC; Tjionas GA; Jorda M; Iczkowski KA
J Urol; 2016 Oct; 196(4):1076-81. PubMed ID: 27265220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Should a Gleason score be assigned to a minute focus of carcinoma on prostate biopsy?
Rubin MA; Dunn R; Kambham N; Misick CP; O'Toole KM
Am J Surg Pathol; 2000 Dec; 24(12):1634-40. PubMed ID: 11117784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Seminal vesicle involvement after radical prostatectomy: predicting risk factors for progression.
Salomon L; Anastasiadis AG; Johnson CW; McKiernan JM; Goluboff ET; Abbou CC; Olsson CA; Benson MC
Urology; 2003 Aug; 62(2):304-9. PubMed ID: 12893340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. [Correlation of the anatomo-pathological staging of radical prostatectomy specimens with the amount of cancer in the preoperative sextant biopsy].
Ojea Calvo A; Núñez López A; Domínguez Freire F; Alonso Rodrigo A; Rodríguez Iglesias B; Benavente Delgado J; Barros Rodríguez JM; Gómez-González MC; González Piñeiro A; Otero García M; Nogueira March JL
Actas Urol Esp; 2003 Jun; 27(6):428-37. PubMed ID: 12918149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. 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]
40. Prognostic Value of Percent Gleason Grade 4 at Prostate Biopsy in Predicting Prostatectomy Pathology and Recurrence.
Cole AI; Morgan TM; Spratt DE; Palapattu GS; He C; Tomlins SA; Weizer AZ; Feng FY; Wu A; Siddiqui J; Chinnaiyan AM; Montgomery JS; Kunju LP; Miller DC; Hollenbeck BK; Wei JT; Mehra R
J Urol; 2016 Aug; 196(2):405-11. PubMed ID: 26920466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
