143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33143905)
1. Gleason grade 5 prostate cancer: sub-patterns and prognosis.
Atallah C; Toi A; van der Kwast TH
Pathology; 2021 Jan; 53(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 33143905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.
Epstein JI; Egevad L; Amin MB; Delahunt B; Srigley JR; Humphrey PA;
Am J Surg Pathol; 2016 Feb; 40(2):244-52. PubMed ID: 26492179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Contemporary Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: An Update With Discussion on Practical Issues to Implement the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.
Epstein JI; Amin MB; Reuter VE; Humphrey PA
Am J Surg Pathol; 2017 Apr; 41(4):e1-e7. PubMed ID: 28177964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Usual and unusual histologic patterns of high Gleason score 8 to 10 adenocarcinoma of the prostate in needle biopsy tissue.
Gottipati S; Warncke J; Vollmer R; Humphrey PA
Am J Surg Pathol; 2012 Jun; 36(6):900-7. PubMed ID: 22367295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. SOCS3 Immunohistochemical Expression Seems to Support the 2005 and 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Modified Gleason Grading System.
Pierconti F; Martini M; Cenci T; Petrone GL; Ricci R; Sacco E; Bassi PF; Larocca LM
Prostate; 2017 May; 77(6):597-603. PubMed ID: 28144985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Prostate cancer with comedonecrosis is frequently, but not exclusively, intraductal carcinoma: a need for reappraisal of grading criteria.
Madan R; Deebajah M; Alanee S; Gupta NS; Carskadon S; Palanisamy N; Williamson SR
Histopathology; 2019 Jun; 74(7):1081-1087. PubMed ID: 30720899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate with Gleason pattern 5 on core biopsy: frequency of diagnosis, morphologic subpatterns, and relation to pattern distribution based on the modified Gleason grading system.
Shah RB; Tadros Y
Hum Pathol; 2014 Nov; 45(11):2263-9. PubMed ID: 25228336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of tumor morphologies and association with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in grade group 5 prostate cancer.
Flood TA; Schieda N; Sim J; Breau RH; Morash C; Belanger EC; Robertson SJ
Virchows Arch; 2018 Feb; 472(2):205-212. PubMed ID: 28975495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Controversial issues in Gleason and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) prostate cancer grading: proposed recommendations for international implementation.
Srigley JR; Delahunt B; Samaratunga H; Billis A; Cheng L; Clouston D; Evans A; Furusato B; Kench J; Leite K; MacLennan G; Moch H; Pan CC; Rioux-Leclercq N; Ro J; Shanks J; Shen S; Tsuzuki T; Varma M; Wheeler T; Yaxley J; Egevad L
Pathology; 2019 Aug; 51(5):463-473. PubMed ID: 31279442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) White Paper on Contemporary Grading of Prostate Cancer.
Epstein JI; Amin MB; Fine SW; Algaba F; Aron M; Baydar DE; Beltran AL; Brimo F; Cheville JC; Colecchia M; Comperat E; da Cunha IW; Delprado W; DeMarzo AM; Giannico GA; Gordetsky JB; Guo CC; Hansel DE; Hirsch MS; Huang J; Humphrey PA; Jimenez RE; Khani F; Kong Q; Kryvenko ON; Kunju LP; Lal P; Latour M; Lotan T; Maclean F; Magi-Galluzzi C; Mehra R; Menon S; Miyamoto H; Montironi R; Netto GJ; Nguyen JK; Osunkoya AO; Parwani A; Robinson BD; Rubin MA; Shah RB; So JS; Takahashi H; Tavora F; Tretiakova MS; True L; Wobker SE; Yang XJ; Zhou M; Zynger DL; Trpkov K
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2021 Apr; 145(4):461-493. PubMed ID: 32589068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. From Gleason to International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading of prostate cancer.
Samaratunga H; Delahunt B; Yaxley J; Srigley JR; Egevad L
Scand J Urol; 2016 Oct; 50(5):325-9. PubMed ID: 27415753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Aggressive Cancer Behavior of Latent Gleason Pattern 5 in Prostatectomy Specimens.
Fujimura T; Fukuhara H; Yamada Y; Taguchi S; Sugihara T; Niimi A; Nakamura M; Nakagawa T; Igawa Y; Homma Y; Kume H
Anticancer Res; 2018 Nov; 38(11):6529-6535. PubMed ID: 30396982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of Gleason pattern 5 including tertiary pattern 5 on outcomes of salvage treatment for biochemical recurrence in pT2-3N0M0 prostate cancer.
Taguchi S; Shiraishi K; Fukuhara H; Nakagawa K; Morikawa T; Naito A; Kakutani S; Takeshima Y; Miyazaki H; Nakagawa T; Fujimura T; Kume H; Homma Y
Int J Clin Oncol; 2016 Oct; 21(5):975-980. PubMed ID: 27098807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Improving the Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator for Initial Prostate Biopsy by Incorporating the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Grading and Cribriform growth.
Roobol MJ; Verbeek JFM; van der Kwast T; Kümmerlin IP; Kweldam CF; van Leenders GJLH
Eur Urol; 2017 Jul; 72(1):45-51. PubMed ID: 28162815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Implications of the International Society of Urological Pathology modified Gleason grading system.
Egevad L; Mazzucchelli R; Montironi R
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2012 Apr; 136(4):426-34. PubMed ID: 22458905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Outcome of Gleason 3 + 5 = 8 Prostate Cancer Diagnosed on Needle Biopsy: Prognostic Comparison with Gleason 4 + 4 = 8.
Harding-Jackson N; Kryvenko ON; Whittington EE; Eastwood DC; Tjionas GA; Jorda M; Iczkowski KA
J Urol; 2016 Oct; 196(4):1076-81. PubMed ID: 27265220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Integrating Tertiary Gleason 5 Patterns into Quantitative Gleason Grading in Prostate Biopsies and Prostatectomy Specimens.
Sauter G; Clauditz T; Steurer S; Wittmer C; Büscheck F; Krech T; Lutz F; Lennartz M; Harms L; Lawrenz L; Möller-Koop C; Simon R; Jacobsen F; Wilczak W; Minner S; Tsourlakis MC; Chirico V; Weidemann S; Haese A; Steuber T; Salomon G; Matiu M; Vettorazzi E; Michl U; Budäus L; Tilki D; Thederan I; Pehrke D; Beyer B; Fraune C; Göbel C; Heinrich M; Juhnke M; Möller K; Bawahab AAA; Uhlig R; Huland H; Heinzer H; Graefen M; Schlomm T
Eur Urol; 2018 May; 73(5):674-683. PubMed ID: 28117112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The impact of the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology consensus guidelines on Gleason grading - a matched-pair analysis.
Berg KD; Thomsen FB; Nerstrøm C; Røder MA; Iversen P; Toft BG; Vainer B; Brasso K
BJU Int; 2016 Jun; 117(6):883-9. PubMed ID: 26823232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evolution, controversies and the future of prostate cancer grading.
Egevad L; Delahunt B; Yaxley J; Samaratunga H
Pathol Int; 2019 Feb; 69(2):55-66. PubMed ID: 30694570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An update of the Gleason grading system.
Epstein JI
J Urol; 2010 Feb; 183(2):433-40. PubMed ID: 20006878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
