506 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30552940)
1. 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]
2. Prospective Evaluation of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Prostate Cancer Detection.
Mertan FV; Greer MD; Shih JH; George AK; Kongnyuy M; Muthigi A; Merino MJ; Wood BJ; Pinto PA; Choyke PL; Turkbey B
J Urol; 2016 Sep; 196(3):690-6. PubMed ID: 27101772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Transcriptome Wide Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy and Matching Surgical Specimens from High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radical Prostatectomy: The Target Must Be Hit.
Radtke JP; Takhar M; Bonekamp D; Kesch C; Erho N; du Plessis M; Buerki C; Ong K; Davicioni E; Hohenfellner M; Hadaschik BA
Eur Urol Focus; 2018 Jul; 4(4):540-546. PubMed ID: 28753844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, Assessment Categories and Pathologic Outcomes in Patients With Gleason Score 3 + 4 = 7 Prostate Cancer Diagnosed at Biopsy.
Lim CS; McInnes MDF; Flood TA; Breau RH; Morash C; Thornhill RE; Schieda N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 May; 208(5):1037-1044. PubMed ID: 28267359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. PI-RADS Version 2 Category on 3 Tesla Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predicts Oncologic Outcomes in Gleason 3 + 4 Prostate Cancer on Biopsy.
Faiena I; Salmasi A; Mendhiratta N; Markovic D; Ahuja P; Hsu W; Elashoff DA; Raman SS; Reiter RE
J Urol; 2019 Jan; 201(1):91-97. PubMed ID: 30142318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Assay Provides Independent Information on Adverse Pathology in the Setting of Combined Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy.
Salmasi A; Said J; Shindel AW; Khoshnoodi P; Felker ER; Sisk AE; Grogan T; McCullough D; Bennett J; Bailey H; Lawrence HJ; Elashoff DA; Marks LS; Raman SS; Febbo PG; Reiter RE
J Urol; 2018 Sep; 200(3):564-572. PubMed ID: 29524506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. High prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) scores are associated with elevated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) grade and biopsy Gleason score, at magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion software-based targeted prostate biopsy after a previous negative standard biopsy.
De Luca S; Passera R; Cattaneo G; Manfredi M; Mele F; Fiori C; Bollito E; Cirillo S; Porpiglia F
BJU Int; 2016 Nov; 118(5):723-730. PubMed ID: 27112799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Risk Stratification of Equivocal Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate.
Ullrich T; Quentin M; Arsov C; Schmaltz AK; Tschischka A; Laqua N; Hiester A; Blondin D; Rabenalt R; Albers P; Antoch G; Schimmöller L
J Urol; 2018 Mar; 199(3):691-698. PubMed ID: 28941924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Comparative analysis of transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy versus magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion guidance.
Radtke JP; Kuru TH; Boxler S; Alt CD; Popeneciu IV; Huettenbrink C; Klein T; Steinemann S; Bergstraesser C; Roethke M; Roth W; Schlemmer HP; Hohenfellner M; Hadaschik BA
J Urol; 2015 Jan; 193(1):87-94. PubMed ID: 25079939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. PI-RADS Version 2 Category on 3 Tesla Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predicts Oncologic Outcomes in Gleason 3 + 4 Prostate Cancer on Biopsy.
Faiena I; Salmasi A; Mendhiratta N; Markovic D; Ahuja P; Hsu W; Elashoff DA; Raman SS; Reiter RE
J Urol; 2019 Jan; 201(1):91-97. PubMed ID: 30577397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Association Between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Score for the Index Lesion and Multifocal, Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.
Stabile A; Dell'Oglio P; De Cobelli F; Esposito A; Gandaglia G; Fossati N; Brembilla G; Cristel G; Cardone G; Deho' F; Losa A; Suardi N; Gaboardi F; Del Maschio A; Montorsi F; Briganti A
Eur Urol Oncol; 2018 May; 1(1):29-36. PubMed ID: 31100225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Utility of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With PI-RADS, Version 2, in Patients With Prostate Cancer Eligible for Active Surveillance: Which Radiologic Characteristics Can Predict Unfavorable Disease?
Kim H; Pak S; Park KJ; Kim MH; Kim JK; Kim M; You D; Jeong IG; Song C; Hong JH; Kim CS; Ahn H
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2020 Feb; 18(1):50-55. PubMed ID: 31640913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Optimizing the Number of Cores Targeted During Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Target Biopsy.
Kenigsberg AP; Renson A; Rosenkrantz AB; Huang R; Wysock JS; Taneja SS; Bjurlin MA
Eur Urol Oncol; 2018 Oct; 1(5):418-425. PubMed ID: 31158081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Analysis of histological findings obtained combining US/mp-MRI fusion-guided biopsies with systematic US biopsies: mp-MRI role in prostate cancer detection and false negative.
Faiella E; Santucci D; Greco F; Frauenfelder G; Giacobbe V; Muto G; Zobel BB; Grasso RF
Radiol Med; 2018 Feb; 123(2):143-152. PubMed ID: 29019021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Percentage Gleason pattern 4 and PI-RADS score predict upgrading in biopsy Grade Group 2 prostate cancer patients without cribriform pattern.
van der Slot MA; Seyrek N; Kweldam CF; den Bakker MA; Busstra MB; Gan M; Klaver S; Rietbergen JBW; van Leenders GJLH
World J Urol; 2022 Nov; 40(11):2723-2729. PubMed ID: 36190529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Systematic versus Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy among Men with Visible Lesions.
Patel HD; Koehne EL; Shea SM; Fang AM; Gorbonos A; Quek ML; Flanigan RC; Goldberg A; Rais-Bahrami S; Gupta GN
J Urol; 2022 Jan; 207(1):108-117. PubMed ID: 34428091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. PI-RADS v2 and periprostatic fat measured on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can predict upgrading in radical prostatectomy pathology amongst patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer.
Zhai L; Fan Y; Sun S; Wang H; Meng Y; Hu S; Wang X; Yu W; Jin J
Scand J Urol; 2018; 52(5-6):333-339. PubMed ID: 30895901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
