264 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30694939)
1. 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]
2. The added influence of genomics and post-MRI confirmatory biopsy results to MRI results alone on medical decision making for men with favorable risk prostate cancer being considered for active surveillance.
Wang M; Qi J; George AK; Semerjian A; Linsell SM; Montie JE; Cher ML; Ginsburg KB;
Prostate; 2022 Jun; 82(10):1068-1074. PubMed ID: 35468226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Serial Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.
Chu CE; Cowan JE; Lonergan PE; Washington SL; Fasulo V; de la Calle CM; Shinohara K; Westphalen AC; Carroll PR
Eur Urol Oncol; 2022 Oct; 5(5):537-543. PubMed ID: 33483265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Is it Time to Perform Only Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Cores? Our Experience with 1,032 Men Who Underwent Prostate Biopsy.
Pepe P; Garufi A; Priolo GD; Galia A; Fraggetta F; Pennisi M
J Urol; 2018 Oct; 200(4):774-778. PubMed ID: 29679618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Genomic Prostate Score, PI-RADS™ version 2 and Progression in Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
Kornberg Z; Cowan JE; Westphalen AC; Cooperberg MR; Chan JM; Zhao S; Shinohara K; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2019 Feb; 201(2):300-307. PubMed ID: 30179620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Predicting Gleason Group Progression for Men on Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Role of a Negative Confirmatory Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.
Bloom JB; Hale GR; Gold SA; Rayn KN; Smith C; Mehralivand S; Czarniecki M; Valera V; Wood BJ; Merino MJ; Choyke PL; Parnes HL; Turkbey B; Pinto PA
J Urol; 2019 Jan; 201(1):84-90. PubMed ID: 30577395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. The Long-Term Risks of Metastases in Men on Active Surveillance for Early Stage Prostate Cancer.
Maggi M; Cowan JE; Fasulo V; Washington SL; Lonergan PE; Sciarra A; Nguyen HG; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2020 Dec; 204(6):1222-1228. PubMed ID: 33157570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Efficacy of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Risk Classification for Patients with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
Recabal P; Assel M; Sjoberg DD; Lee D; Laudone VP; Touijer K; Eastham JA; Vargas HA; Coleman J; Ehdaie B
J Urol; 2016 Aug; 196(2):374-81. PubMed ID: 26920465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Combined Clinical Parameters and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Advanced Risk Modeling of Prostate Cancer-Patient-tailored Risk Stratification Can Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies.
Radtke JP; Wiesenfarth M; Kesch C; Freitag MT; Alt CD; Celik K; Distler F; Roth W; Wieczorek K; Stock C; Duensing S; Roethke MC; Teber D; Schlemmer HP; Hohenfellner M; Bonekamp D; Hadaschik BA
Eur Urol; 2017 Dec; 72(6):888-896. PubMed ID: 28400169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Practice-Level Variation in the Decision to Biopsy Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3 Lesions in Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients.
Versalle D; Qi J; Noyes SL; Moriarity A; George A; Cher ML; Lane BR;
Urology; 2022 Jun; 164():191-196. PubMed ID: 35081398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Multiparametric Magnetic-Resonance to Confirm Eligibility to an Active Surveillance Program for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Intermediate Time Results of a Third Referral High Volume Centre Active Surveillance Protocol.
Luzzago S; Musi G; Catellani M; Russo A; Di Trapani E; Mistretta FA; Bianchi R; Cozzi G; Conti A; Pricolo P; Ferro M; Matei DV; Mirone V; Petralia G; de Cobelli O
Urol Int; 2018; 101(1):56-64. PubMed ID: 29734177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy Improves Selection of Patients Considered for Active Surveillance for Clinically Low Risk Prostate Cancer Based on Systematic Biopsies.
Ouzzane A; Renard-Penna R; Marliere F; Mozer P; Olivier J; Barkatz J; Puech P; Villers A
J Urol; 2015 Aug; 194(2):350-6. PubMed ID: 25747105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Role of Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Clinical Stage in Evaluation of Disease Progression for Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
Chesnut GT; Vertosick EA; Benfante N; Sjoberg DD; Fainberg J; Lee T; Eastham J; Laudone V; Scardino P; Touijer K; Vickers A; Ehdaie B
Eur Urol; 2020 Apr; 77(4):501-507. PubMed ID: 31874726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Further reduction of disqualification rates by additional MRI-targeted biopsy with transperineal saturation biopsy compared with standard 12-core systematic biopsies for the selection of prostate cancer patients for active surveillance.
Radtke JP; Kuru TH; Bonekamp D; Freitag MT; Wolf MB; Alt CD; Hatiboglu G; Boxler S; Pahernik S; Roth W; Roethke MC; Schlemmer HP; Hohenfellner M; Hadaschik BA
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2016 Sep; 19(3):283-91. PubMed ID: 27184812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy in Active Surveillance.
Ma TM; Tosoian JJ; Schaeffer EM; Landis P; Wolf S; Macura KJ; Epstein JI; Mamawala M; Carter HB
Eur Urol; 2017 Feb; 71(2):174-180. PubMed ID: 27236496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
