212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33206437)
1. Prostate cancer grading, time to go back to the future.
Egevad L; Delahunt B; Bostwick DG; Cheng L; Evans AJ; Gianduzzo T; Graefen M; Hugosson J; Kench JG; Leite KRM; Oxley J; Sauter G; Srigley JR; Stattin P; Tsuzuki T; Yaxley J; Samaratunga H
BJU Int; 2021 Feb; 127(2):165-168. PubMed ID: 33206437
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [Prostate cancer. Part 2: Review of the various tumor grading systems over the years 1966-2015 and future perspectives of the new grading of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)].
Helpap B; Bubendorf L; Kristiansen G
Pathologe; 2016 Feb; 37(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 26792002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [The 2014 consensus conference of the ISUP on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma].
Kristiansen G; Egevad L; Amin M; Delahunt B; Srigley JR; Humphrey PA; Epstein JI;
Pathologe; 2016 Feb; 37(1):17-26. PubMed ID: 26809207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Commentary on "Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for predicting pathologic T3 disease in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: Implications for prostate brachytherapy".
Wallner KE
Brachytherapy; 2013; 12(3):202. PubMed ID: 23415049
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Editorial comment.
Labanaris AP
J Urol; 2013 Mar; 189(3):866. PubMed ID: 23261235
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Brachytherapy and MRI: seeing what we are missing.
Riaz N; Zelefsky MJ
Brachytherapy; 2013; 12(3):203. PubMed ID: 23415595
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Words of wisdom: re: transperineal magnetic resonance image targeted prostate biopsy versus transperineal template prostate biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.
Ravery V
Eur Urol; 2013 Aug; 64(2):337. PubMed ID: 23830225
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Editorial Comment to Active surveillance criteria for prostate cancer: can they be applied to Japanese patients?
Suzuki M
Int J Urol; 2012 Feb; 19(2):167-8. PubMed ID: 22092371
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Developing a model for forecasting Gleason score ≥7 in potential prostate cancer patients to reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies.
Li X; Pan Y; Huang Y; Wang J; Zhang C; Wu J; Cheng G; Qin C; Hua L; Wang Z
Int Urol Nephrol; 2016 Apr; 48(4):535-40. PubMed ID: 26810323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Re: Transperineal template-guided saturation biopsy using a modified technique: outcome of 270 cases requiring repeat prostate biopsy.
Taneja SS
J Urol; 2013 Oct; 190(4):1245-6. PubMed ID: 24029308
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Prostate cancer glands with cribriform architecture and with glomeruloid features should be considered as Gleason pattern 4 and not pattern 3.
Minardi D; Mazzucchelli R; Scarpelli M; Massari F; Ciccarese C; Lopez-Beltran A; Cheng L; Montironi R
Future Oncol; 2016 Jun; 12(12):1431-3. PubMed ID: 27189718
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The utility of artificial intelligence in the assessment of prostate pathology.
Egevad L; Ström P; Kartasalo K; Olsson H; Samaratunga H; Delahunt B; Eklund M
Histopathology; 2020 May; 76(6):790-792. PubMed ID: 32402150
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Words of wisdom. Re: Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy.
Villers A
Eur Urol; 2014 Jun; 65(6):1218-9. PubMed ID: 24774825
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Reply by author.
J Urol; 2013 Sep; 190(3):1140. PubMed ID: 23770372
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. To biopsy or not to biopsy: minimizing the risk of prostate needle biopsy.
Kibel AS
J Urol; 2013 Mar; 189(3):796-7. PubMed ID: 23246850
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [The pathologist's role: to diagnose prostatic cancer and determine prognosis].
Egevad L
Lakartidningen; 2012 Feb 22-28; 109(8):403-6. PubMed ID: 22509665
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Re: To biopsy or not to biopsy: minimizing the risk of prostate needle biopsy: A. S. Kibel J Urol 2013; 189: 796-797.
Horan AH
J Urol; 2013 Sep; 190(3):1139. PubMed ID: 23583228
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Prostate cancer grading: recent developments and future directions.
Delahunt B; Egevad L; Grignon DJ; Srigley JR; Samaratunga H
BJU Int; 2016 Apr; 117 Suppl 4():7-8. PubMed ID: 27094970
[No 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. Prostate Cancer Grading: A Decade After the 2005 Modified Gleason Grading System.
Kryvenko ON; Epstein JI
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2016 Oct; 140(10):1140-52. PubMed ID: 26756649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
