447 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32591889)
1. Using decision curve analysis to benchmark performance of a magnetic resonance imaging-based deep learning model for prostate cancer risk assessment.
Deniffel D; Abraham N; Namdar K; Dong X; Salinas E; Milot L; Khalvati F; Haider MA
Eur Radiol; 2020 Dec; 30(12):6867-6876. PubMed ID: 32591889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Avoiding Unnecessary Biopsy: MRI-based Risk Models versus a PI-RADS and PSA Density Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.
Deniffel D; Healy GM; Dong X; Ghai S; Salinas-Miranda E; Fleshner N; Hamilton R; Kulkarni G; Toi A; van der Kwast T; Zlotta A; Finelli A; Perlis N; Haider MA
Radiology; 2021 Aug; 300(2):369-379. PubMed ID: 34032510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of different thresholds of PSA density for risk stratification of PI-RADSv2.1 categories on prostate MRI.
Girometti R; Giannarini G; Panebianco V; Maresca S; Cereser L; De Martino M; Pizzolitto S; Pecoraro M; Ficarra V; Zuiani C; Valotto C
Br J Radiol; 2022 Mar; 95(1131):20210886. PubMed ID: 34762506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Prebiopsy multiparametric MRI and PI-RADS version 2.0 for differentiating histologically benign prostate disease from prostate cancer in biopsies: A retrospective single-center comparison.
Tosun M; Uslu H
Clin Imaging; 2021 Oct; 78():98-103. PubMed ID: 33773450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. How to make clinical decisions to avoid unnecessary prostate screening in biopsy-naïve men with PI-RADs v2 score ≤ 3?
Zhang Y; Zeng N; Zhang F; Huang Y; Tian Y
Int J Clin Oncol; 2020 Jan; 25(1):175-186. PubMed ID: 31473884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Combined Use of Prostate-specific Antigen Density and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Biopsy Decision Planning: A Retrospective Multi-institutional Study Using the Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database (PROMOD).
Falagario UG; Jambor I; Lantz A; Ettala O; Stabile A; Taimen P; Aronen HJ; Knaapila J; Perez IM; Gandaglia G; Fossati N; Martini A; Cucchiara V; Picker W; Haug E; Ratnani P; Haines K; Lewis S; Sujit N; Selvaggio O; Sanguedolce F; Macarini L; Cormio L; Nordström T; Tewari A; Briganti A; Boström PJ; Carrieri G
Eur Urol Oncol; 2021 Dec; 4(6):971-979. PubMed ID: 32972896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Multivariable stratification of PI-RADS version 2.1 categories for the risk of false-positive target biopsy: Impact on prostate biopsy decisions.
Girometti R; Giannarini G; De Martino M; Caregnato E; Cereser L; Soligo M; Rozze D; Pizzolitto S; Isola M; Zuiani C
Eur J Radiol; 2023 Aug; 165():110897. PubMed ID: 37300933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. MRI combined with PSA density in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL: Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI.
Han C; Liu S; Qin XB; Ma S; Zhu LN; Wang XY
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2020 Apr; 101(4):235-244. PubMed ID: 32063483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 3-T Multiparametric MRI Followed by In-Bore MR-Guided Biopsy for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer After Prior Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy.
Hosseiny M; Shakeri S; Felker ER; Lu D; Sayre J; Ahuja P; Raman SS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Sep; 215(3):660-666. PubMed ID: 32755166
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Prostate Health Index and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to predict prostate cancer grade reclassification in active surveillance.
Schwen ZR; Mamawala M; Tosoian JJ; Druskin SC; Ross AE; Sokoll LJ; Epstein JI; Carter HB; Gorin MA; Pavlovich CP
BJU Int; 2020 Sep; 126(3):373-378. PubMed ID: 32367635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Performance of magnetic resonance imaging-based prostate cancer risk calculators and decision strategies in two large European medical centres.
Davik P; Remmers S; Elschot M; Roobol MJ; Bathen TF; Bertilsson H
BJU Int; 2024 Mar; 133(3):278-288. PubMed ID: 37607322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prostate biopsy in the era of MRI-targeting: towards a judicious use of additional systematic biopsy.
Deniffel D; Perlis N; Ghai S; Girgis S; Healy GM; Fleshner N; Hamilton R; Kulkarni G; Toi A; van der Kwast T; Zlotta A; Finelli A; Haider MA
Eur Radiol; 2022 Nov; 32(11):7544-7554. PubMed ID: 35507051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14.
Barnett CL; Davenport MS; Montgomery JS; Kunju LP; Denton BT; Piert M
J Nucl Med; 2019 Dec; 60(12):1705-1712. PubMed ID: 31350321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Avoiding Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Biopsies: Negative and Positive Predictive Value of MRI According to Prostate-specific Antigen Density, 4Kscore and Risk Calculators.
Falagario UG; Martini A; Wajswol E; Treacy PJ; Ratnani P; Jambor I; Anastos H; Lewis S; Haines K; Cormio L; Carrieri G; Rastinehad AR; Wiklund P; Tewari A
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Oct; 3(5):700-704. PubMed ID: 31548130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Combining clinical parameters and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to stratify biopsy-naïve men for an optimum diagnostic strategy with prostate-specific antigen 4 ng ml
Zhang CC; Tu X; Lin TH; Cai DM; Yang L; Qiu S; Liu ZH; Yang L; Wei Q
Asian J Androl; 2023; 25(4):492-498. PubMed ID: 36571328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Combined Analysis of Biparametric MRI and Prostate-Specific Antigen Density: Role in the Prebiopsy Diagnosis of Gleason Score 7 or Greater Prostate Cancer.
Lee SJ; Oh YT; Jung DC; Cho NH; Choi YD; Park SY
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Sep; 211(3):W166-W172. PubMed ID: 30016148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Intra- and interreader reproducibility of PI-RADSv2: A multireader study.
Smith CP; Harmon SA; Barrett T; Bittencourt LK; Law YM; Shebel H; An JY; Czarniecki M; Mehralivand S; Coskun M; Wood BJ; Pinto PA; Shih JH; Choyke PL; Turkbey B
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Jun; 49(6):1694-1703. PubMed ID: 30575184
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Who with suspected prostate cancer can benefit from Proclarix after multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging?
Morote J; Campistol M; Regis L; Celma A; de Torres I; Semidey ME; Roche S; Mast R; Santamaria A; Planas J; Trilla E
Int J Biol Markers; 2022 Jun; 37(2):218-223. PubMed ID: 35200058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prospective comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and qualitative in-house categorization system in detection of prostate cancer.
Gaur S; Harmon S; Mehralivand S; Bednarova S; Calio BP; Sugano D; Sidana A; Merino MJ; Pinto PA; Wood BJ; Shih JH; Choyke PL; Turkbey B
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Nov; 48(5):1326-1335. PubMed ID: 29603833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
