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 *

275 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33026927)

  • 21. Do patients with a PI-RADS 5 lesion identified on magnetic resonance imaging require systematic biopsy in addition to targeted biopsy?
    Drobish JN; Bevill MD; Tracy CR; Sexton SM; Rajput M; Metz CM; Gellhaus PT
    Urol Oncol; 2021 Apr; 39(4):235.e1-235.e4. PubMed ID: 33451935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Risk-based Patient Selection for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy after Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Random Biopsy Avoids Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scans.
    Alberts AR; Schoots IG; Bokhorst LP; van Leenders GJ; Bangma CH; Roobol MJ
    Eur Urol; 2016 Jun; 69(6):1129-34. PubMed ID: 26651990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The Institutional Learning Curve of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Temporal Improvements in Cancer Detection in 4 Years.
    Meng X; Rosenkrantz AB; Huang R; Deng FM; Wysock JS; Bjurlin MA; Huang WC; Lepor H; Taneja SS
    J Urol; 2018 Nov; 200(5):1022-1029. PubMed ID: 29886090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Who Can Avoid Systematic Biopsy Without Missing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men Who Undergo Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy?
    Nakanishi Y; Ito M; Fukushima H; Yokoyama M; Kataoka M; Ikuta S; Sakamoto K; Takemura K; Suzuki H; Tobisu KI; Koga F
    Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2019 Jun; 17(3):e664-e671. PubMed ID: 31003892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Prospective Evaluation of PI-RADS™ Version 2 Using the International Society of Urological Pathology Prostate Cancer Grade Group System.
    Mehralivand S; Bednarova S; Shih JH; Mertan FV; Gaur S; Merino MJ; Wood BJ; Pinto PA; Choyke PL; Turkbey B
    J Urol; 2017 Sep; 198(3):583-590. PubMed ID: 28373133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. PI-RADS Version 2: Detection of Clinically Significant Cancer in Patients With Biopsy Gleason Score 6 Prostate Cancer.
    Seo JW; Shin SJ; Taik Oh Y; Jung DC; Cho NH; Choi YD; Park SY
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jul; 209(1):W1-W9. PubMed ID: 28418690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Risk of Prostate Cancer after a Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Biopsy.
    Kinnaird A; Sharma V; Chuang R; Priester A; Tran E; Barsa DE; Delfin M; Kwan L; Sisk A; Felker E; Marks LS
    J Urol; 2020 Dec; 204(6):1180-1186. PubMed ID: 32614257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Biomarker vs MRI-Enhanced Strategies for Prostate Cancer Screening: The STHLM3-MRI Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Björnebo L; Discacciati A; Falagario U; Vigneswaran HT; Jäderling F; Grönberg H; Eklund M; Nordström T; Lantz A
    JAMA Netw Open; 2024 Apr; 7(4):e247131. PubMed ID: 38648061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Detection of significant prostate cancer with magnetic resonance targeted biopsies--should transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging fusion guided biopsies alone be a standard of care?
    Delongchamps NB; Lefèvre A; Bouazza N; Beuvon F; Legman P; Cornud F
    J Urol; 2015 Apr; 193(4):1198-204. PubMed ID: 25451824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Transperineal magnetic resonance image targeted prostate biopsy versus transperineal template prostate biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.
    Kasivisvanathan V; Dufour R; Moore CM; Ahmed HU; Abd-Alazeez M; Charman SC; Freeman A; Allen C; Kirkham A; van der Meulen J; Emberton M
    J Urol; 2013 Mar; 189(3):860-6. PubMed ID: 23063807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Detection of Gleason 6 prostate cancer in patients with clinically significant prostate cancer on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.
    Chaloupka M; Bischoff R; Pfitzinger P; Lellig E; Ledderose S; Buchner A; Schlenker B; Stief C; Clevert DA; Apfelbeck M
    Clin Hemorheol Microcirc; 2019; 73(1):105-111. PubMed ID: 31561351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Why Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy Miss Clinically Significant Cancer?
    Williams C; Ahdoot M; Daneshvar MA; Hague C; Wilbur AR; Gomella PT; Shih J; Khondakar N; Yerram N; Mehralivand S; Gurram S; Siddiqui M; Pinsky P; Parnes H; Merino M; Wood B; Turkbey B; Pinto PA
    J Urol; 2022 Jan; 207(1):95-107. PubMed ID: 34433302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Diagnostic Performance of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Fusion Targeted Biopsy to Detect Significant Prostate Cancer.
    Hoffmann MA; Taymoorian K; Ruf C; Gerhards A; Leyendecker K; Stein T; Jakobs FM; Schreckenberger M
    Anticancer Res; 2017 Dec; 37(12):6871-6877. PubMed ID: 29187467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Value of 3-Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy for improved risk stratification in patients considered for active surveillance.
    Pessoa RR; Viana PC; Mattedi RL; Guglielmetti GB; Cordeiro MD; Coelho RF; Nahas WC; Srougi M
    BJU Int; 2017 Apr; 119(4):535-542. PubMed ID: 27500389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comparison of Targeted vs Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men Who Are Biopsy Naive: The Prospective Assessment of Image Registration in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PAIREDCAP) Study.
    Elkhoury FF; Felker ER; Kwan L; Sisk AE; Delfin M; Natarajan S; Marks LS
    JAMA Surg; 2019 Sep; 154(9):811-818. PubMed ID: 31188412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Missing the Mark: Prostate Cancer Upgrading by Systematic Biopsy over Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.
    Muthigi A; George AK; Sidana A; Kongnyuy M; Simon R; Moreno V; Merino MJ; Choyke PL; Turkbey B; Wood BJ; Pinto PA
    J Urol; 2017 Feb; 197(2):327-334. PubMed ID: 27582434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.