143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34783714)
1. Is Grade Group 1 (Gleason score 3 + 3 = 6) adenocarcinoma of the prostate really cancer?
Epstein JI
Curr Opin Urol; 2022 Jan; 32(1):91-95. PubMed ID: 34783714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical outcome comparison of Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 prostate cancer with and without cribriform architecture at the time of radical prostatectomy.
Hollemans E; Verhoef EI; Bangma CH; Rietbergen J; Roobol MJ; Helleman J; van Leenders GJLH
Histopathology; 2020 Apr; 76(5):755-762. PubMed ID: 31944367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The Clinical Significance of Perineural Invasion by Prostate Cancer on Needle Core Biopsy: Involvement of Single Versus Multiple Sextant Sites.
Bell PD; Teramoto Y; Gurung PMS; Numbere N; Yang Z; Miyamoto H
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2022 Oct; 146(10):1252-1257. PubMed ID: 35020791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Risk of Biochemical Recurrence in Patients With Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer With Extraprostatic Extension Treated With Radical Prostatectomy.
Rezaee ME; Pallauf M; Fletcher SA; Han M; Pavlovich CP; Cornelia Ding CK; Epstein JI; Allaf ME; Trock BJ; Singla N
J Urol; 2024 Mar; 211(3):407-414. PubMed ID: 38109699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. How Much Reliable Is the Current Belief on Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer?
Chung MS; Choi YJ; Lee YS; Yoon BI; Ha US
Pathol Oncol Res; 2021; 27():629489. PubMed ID: 34257593
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Prostate Adenocarcinoma Grade Group 1: Rationale for Retaining a Cancer Label in the 2022 World Health Organization Classification.
Netto GJ; Amin MB; Compérat EM; Gill AJ; Hartmann A; Moch H; Menon S; Raspollini MR; Rubin MA; Srigley JR; Hoon Tan P; Tickoo SK; Tsuzuki T; Turajlic S; Cree I; Berney DM
Eur Urol; 2023 Apr; 83(4):301-303. PubMed ID: 36202687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluating the Outcomes of Active Surveillance in Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Prospective Results from the Canary PASS Cohort.
Waisman Malaret AJ; Chang P; Zhu K; Zheng Y; Newcomb LF; Liu M; McKenney JK; Brooks JD; Carroll P; Dash A; Filson CP; Gleave ME; Liss M; Martin FM; Morgan TM; Nelson PS; Lin DW; Wagner AA
J Urol; 2022 Apr; 207(4):805-813. PubMed ID: 34854745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prediction of pathological stage based on clinical stage, serum prostate-specific antigen, and biopsy Gleason score: Partin Tables in the contemporary era.
Tosoian JJ; Chappidi M; Feng Z; Humphreys EB; Han M; Pavlovich CP; Epstein JI; Partin AW; Trock BJ
BJU Int; 2017 May; 119(5):676-683. PubMed ID: 27367645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. PIN-like (Ductal) Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate.
Paulk A; Giannico G; Epstein JI
Am J Surg Pathol; 2018 Dec; 42(12):1693-1700. PubMed ID: 30138215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluating the Safety of Active Surveillance: Outcomes of Deferred Radical Prostatectomy after an Initial Period of Surveillance.
Balakrishnan AS; Cowan JE; Cooperberg MR; Shinohara K; Nguyen HG; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2019 Sep; 202(3):506-510. PubMed ID: 30958738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Downgrading of grade group 2 intermediate-risk prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: Comparison of outcomes and predictors to identify potential candidates for active surveillance.
Su ZT; Patel HD; Epstein JI; Pavlovich CP; Allaf ME
Cancer; 2020 Apr; 126(8):1632-1639. PubMed ID: 32031685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Grade group 2 (10% ≥ GP4) patients have very similar malignant potential with grade group 1 patients, given the risk of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate.
Kato M; Hirakawa A; Sato H; Hanazawa R; Naito Y; Tochigi K; Sano T; Ishida S; Funahashi Y; Fujita T; Matsukawa Y; Hattori R; Tsuzuki T
Int J Clin Oncol; 2021 Apr; 26(4):764-769. PubMed ID: 33385274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Questioning the Status Quo: Should Gleason Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer be Considered a "Negative Core" in Pre-Radical Prostatectomy Risk Nomograms? An International Multicenter Analysis.
Leong JY; Herrera-Caceres JO; Goldberg H; Tham E; Teplitsky S; Gomella LG; Trabulsi EJ; Lallas CD; Fleshner NE; Tilki D; Chandrasekar T
Urology; 2020 Mar; 137():102-107. PubMed ID: 31705947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Metastatic potential to regional lymph nodes with Gleason score ≤7, including tertiary pattern 5, at radical prostatectomy.
Diolombi ML; Epstein JI
BJU Int; 2017 Jun; 119(6):872-878. PubMed ID: 27496532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The Gleason pattern 4 in radical prostatectomy specimens in current practice - Quantification, morphology and concordance with biopsy.
de Souza MF; de Azevedo Araujo ALC; da Silva MT; Athanazio DA
Ann Diagn Pathol; 2018 Jun; 34():13-17. PubMed ID: 29661718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Improved Prostate Cancer Biopsy Grading by Incorporation of Invasive Cribriform and Intraductal Carcinoma in the 2014 Grade Groups.
van Leenders GJLH; Kweldam CF; Hollemans E; Kümmerlin IP; Nieboer D; Verhoef EI; Remmers S; Incrocci L; Bangma CH; van der Kwast TH; Roobol MJ
Eur Urol; 2020 Feb; 77(2):191-198. PubMed ID: 31439369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Should Grade Group 1 (GG1) be called cancer?
Labbate CV; Paner GP; Eggener SE
World J Urol; 2022 Jan; 40(1):15-19. PubMed ID: 33432506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The influence of the "cancer" label on perceptions and management decisions for low-grade prostate cancer.
Berlin A; Ramotar M; Santiago AT; Liu Z; Li J; Wolinsky H; Wallis CJD; Chua MLK; Paner GP; van der Kwast T; Cooperberg MR; Vickers AJ; Urbach DR; Eggener SE
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2023 Nov; 115(11):1364-1373. PubMed ID: 37285311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Grade Group Underestimation in Prostate Biopsy: Predictive Factors and Outcomes in Candidates for Active Surveillance.
Audenet F; Rozet F; Resche-Rigon M; Bernard R; Ingels A; Prapotnich D; Sanchez-Salas R; Galiano M; Barret E; Cathelineau X
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2017 Dec; 15(6):e907-e913. PubMed ID: 28522288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
