These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32602890)

  • 1. Response to Lehrer and Rheinstein.
    Fedewa SA; Ma J; Jemal A
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2020 Oct; 112(10):1069-1070. PubMed ID: 32602890
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Re: Prostate Cancer Incidence 5 Years After US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations Against Screening.
    Lehrer S; Rheinstein PH
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2020 Oct; 112(10):1067-1068. PubMed ID: 32602898
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Long-term consequences of the USPSTF Grade D recommendation for prostate-specific antigen screening.
    Joshi SS; Filson CP
    Cancer; 2020 Feb; 126(4):694-696. PubMed ID: 31794066
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. New US Preventive Service Task Force recommendations for prostate cancer screening: a needed update, but not enough.
    Wroclawski ML
    Einstein (Sao Paulo); 2017; 15(3):7-10. PubMed ID: 29091165
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Guideline: USPSTF recommends against PSA screening except in men 55 to 69 years who express a preference for it.
    Dickinson JA
    Ann Intern Med; 2018 Sep; 169(6):JC28. PubMed ID: 30242401
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Re: National Prostate Cancer Screening Rates after the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Discouraging Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening.
    Penson DF
    J Urol; 2016 Apr; 195(4 Pt 1):928-9. PubMed ID: 27302784
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations and prostate cancer screening rates.
    Prasad SM; Drazer MW; Huo D; Hu JC; Eggener SE
    JAMA; 2012 Apr; 307(16):1692-4. PubMed ID: 22535850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The current state of prostate-specific antigen testing.
    Lewis R; Hornberger B
    JAAPA; 2016 Sep; 29(9):51-3. PubMed ID: 27575906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A History of the United States Preventive Services Task Force: Its Expanding Authority and Need for Reform.
    Kapoor DA
    J Urol; 2018 Jan; 199(1):37-39. PubMed ID: 28827107
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Re: Turini et al.: The State of Prescreening Discussions About Prostate-specific Antigen Testing Following Implementation of the 2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force Statement (Urology 2017;104:122-130).
    de Riese W; Verlage K; Grand R; de Riese CS; Cammack JT
    Urology; 2018 Apr; 114():246. PubMed ID: 28554516
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evolving detection and treatment methods change approaches to prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force draft recommendations now align more closely with others.
    Printz C
    Cancer; 2018 Jan; 124(1):11-12. PubMed ID: 29251768
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Twitter response to the 2018 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines on prostate cancer screening.
    Ke Y; Taylor J; Gao L; Wang H; Zhao H; Byrne N; Modgil V; Butaney M; Makarov DV; Prabhu V; Loeb S
    BJU Int; 2019 Sep; 124(3):363-364. PubMed ID: 30811805
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Educational Material on Prostate Cancer Screening is Overly Complex and Fails to Meet Recommended Layperson Readability Guidelines.
    Rooney MK; Morgans AK; Chen RC; Golden DW; Meeks JJ; Auffenberg G; Kundu SD; Schaeffer EM; Hussain MH; Kalapurakal JA; Sachdev S
    Urology; 2020 Jan; 135():1-3. PubMed ID: 31669135
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Draft screening guidelines spark debate: possible drawbacks and long-term effects of new draft guidelines for prostate cancer screening.
    Printz C
    Cancer; 2012 May; 118(9):2335-6. PubMed ID: 22522608
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. US expert panel recommends against prostate cancer screening.
    Lenzer J; Brownlee S
    BMJ; 2011 Oct; 343():d6479. PubMed ID: 21987717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Screening for prostate cancer.
    Whisnant JD
    N C Med J; 2002; 63(3):178-9. PubMed ID: 12181860
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Prostate cancer incidence across stage, NCCN risk groups, and age before and after USPSTF Grade D recommendations against prostate-specific antigen screening in 2012.
    Butler SS; Muralidhar V; Zhao SG; Sanford NN; Franco I; Fullerton ZH; Chavez J; D'Amico AV; Feng FY; Rebbeck TR; Nguyen PL; Mahal BA
    Cancer; 2020 Feb; 126(4):717-724. PubMed ID: 31794057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Psychological research and the prostate-cancer screening controversy.
    Arkes HR; Gaissmaier W
    Psychol Sci; 2012 Jun; 23(6):547-53. PubMed ID: 22555966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Screening for Pancreatic Cancer Gets a D, but the Student Is Improving.
    Hruban RH; Lillemoe KD
    JAMA Surg; 2019 Sep; 154(9):795-797. PubMed ID: 31386099
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prostate cancer: what is the right message?
    Glina S; Pasternak J
    Einstein (Sao Paulo); 2015; 13(4):7-8. PubMed ID: 26761546
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.