153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34087311)
1. Utility of PSA Density in Predicting Upgraded Gleason Score in Men on Active Surveillance With Negative MRI.
Press BH; Khajir G; Ghabili K; Leung C; Fan RE; Wang NN; Leapman MS; Sonn GA; Sprenkle PC
Urology; 2021 Sep; 155():96-100. PubMed ID: 34087311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The ability of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density to predict an upgrade in Gleason score between initial prostate biopsy and prostatectomy diminishes with increasing tumour grade due to reduced PSA secretion per unit tumour volume.
Corcoran NM; Casey RG; Hong MK; Pedersen J; Connolly S; Peters J; Harewood L; Gleave ME; Costello AJ; Hovens CM; Goldenberg SL
BJU Int; 2012 Jul; 110(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 22085203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. MRI-Based Prostate-Specific Antigen Density Predicts Gleason Score Upgrade in an Active Surveillance Cohort.
Washington SL; Baskin AS; Ameli N; Nguyen HG; Westphalen AC; Shinohara K; Carroll PR
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Mar; 214(3):574-578. PubMed ID: 31913068
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Follow-up of Patients Included in Active Surveillance Protocol. Can PSA Density Discriminate Patients at Different Risk of Reclassification?
Roscigno M; Stabile A; Lughezzani G; Pepe P; Galosi AB; Naselli A; Naspro R; Nicolai M; La Croce G; Aljoulani M; Perugini G; Guazzoni G; Montorsi F; Balzarini L; Sironi S; Da Pozzo LF
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2020 Dec; 18(6):e698-e704. PubMed ID: 32493676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Unified model involving genomics, magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density outperforms individual co-variables at predicting biopsy upgrading in patients on active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer.
Beksac AT; Ratnani P; Dovey Z; Parekh S; Falagario U; Roshandel R; Sobotka S; Kewlani D; Davis A; Weil R; Bashorun H; Jambor I; Lewis S; Haines K; Tewari AK
Cancer Rep (Hoboken); 2022 Mar; 5(3):e1492. PubMed ID: 34931468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.
Alberts AR; Roobol MJ; Drost FH; van Leenders GJ; Bokhorst LP; Bangma CH; Schoots IG
BJU Int; 2017 Oct; 120(4):511-519. PubMed ID: 28267899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical utility of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy in patients with lower suspicion lesions on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.
Lokeshwar SD; Nguyen J; Rahman SN; Khajir G; Ho R; Ghabili K; Leapman MS; Weinreb JC; Sprenkle PC
Urol Oncol; 2022 Sep; 40(9):407.e21-407.e27. PubMed ID: 35811206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Confirmatory Biopsy for Initiating Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.
Jayadevan R; Felker ER; Kwan L; Barsa DE; Zhang H; Sisk AE; Delfin M; Marks LS
JAMA Netw Open; 2019 Sep; 2(9):e1911019. PubMed ID: 31509206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The influence of prostate-specific antigen density on positive and negative predictive values of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer in a repeat biopsy setting.
Hansen NL; Barrett T; Koo B; Doble A; Gnanapragasam V; Warren A; Kastner C; Bratt O
BJU Int; 2017 May; 119(5):724-730. PubMed ID: 27488931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The role of mpMRI and PSA density in patients with an initial negative prostatic biopsy.
Kotb AF; Spaner S; Crump T; Hyndman ME
World J Urol; 2018 Dec; 36(12):2021-2025. PubMed ID: 29808301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. PSA density is complementary to prostate MP-MRI PI-RADS scoring system for risk stratification of clinically significant prostate cancer.
Frisbie JW; Van Besien AJ; Lee A; Xu L; Wang S; Choksi A; Afzal MA; Naslund MJ; Lane B; Wong J; Wnorowski A; Siddiqui MM
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2023 Jun; 26(2):347-352. PubMed ID: 35523940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Factors predicting prostate cancer upgrading on magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy in an active surveillance population.
Lai WS; Gordetsky JB; Thomas JV; Nix JW; Rais-Bahrami S
Cancer; 2017 Jun; 123(11):1941-1948. PubMed ID: 28140460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Utilizing lesion diameter and prostate specific antigen density to decide on magnetic resonance imaging guided confirmatory biopsy of prostate imaging reporting and data system score three lesions in African American prostate cancer patients managed with active surveillance.
Alanee S; Deebajah M; Dabaja A; Peabody J; Menon M
Int Urol Nephrol; 2022 Apr; 54(4):799-803. PubMed ID: 35138582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial.
Pye H; Singh S; Norris JM; Carmona Echeverria LM; Stavrinides V; Grey A; Dinneen E; Pilavachi E; Clemente J; Heavey S; Stopka-Farooqui U; Simpson BS; Bonet-Carne E; Patel D; Barker P; Burling K; Stevens N; Ng T; Panagiotaki E; Hawkes D; Alexander DC; Rodriguez-Justo M; Haider A; Freeman A; Kirkham A; Atkinson D; Allen C; Shaw G; Beeston T; Brizmohun Appayya M; Latifoltojar A; Johnston EW; Emberton M; Moore CM; Ahmed HU; Punwani S; Whitaker HC
Cancers (Basel); 2021 Apr; 13(8):. PubMed ID: 33924255
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Baseline prostate health index risk category and risk category changes during active surveillance predict grade reclassification.
de la Calle CM; Jing Y; Mamawala MM; Landis P; Macura KJ; Trock BJ; Epstein JI; Sokoll LJ; Pavlovich CP
Urol Oncol; 2023 Nov; 41(11):455.e1-455.e6. PubMed ID: 37722985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Detection of clinically signifi cant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions.
Westphalen AC; Fazel F; Nguyen H; Cabarrus M; Hanley-Knutson K; Shinohara K; Carroll PR
Int Braz J Urol; 2019; 45(4):713-723. PubMed ID: 31136112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prostate-specific antigen vs prostate-specific antigen density as a predictor of upgrading in men diagnosed with Gleason 6 prostate cancer by contemporary multicore prostate biopsy.
Oh JJ; Hong SK; Lee JK; Lee BK; Lee S; Kwon OS; Byun SS; Lee SE
BJU Int; 2012 Dec; 110(11 Pt B):E494-9. PubMed ID: 22540236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
