116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35254666)
21. Risk Factors for Biopsy Reclassification over Time in Men on Active Surveillance for Early Stage Prostate Cancer.
Lonergan PE; Washington SL; Cowan JE; Zhao S; Nguyen HG; Shinohara K; Cooperberg MR; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2020 Dec; 204(6):1216-1221. PubMed ID: 32519915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A Decade of Active Surveillance in the PRIAS Study: An Update and Evaluation of the Criteria Used to Recommend a Switch to Active Treatment.
Bokhorst LP; Valdagni R; Rannikko A; Kakehi Y; Pickles T; Bangma CH; Roobol MJ;
Eur Urol; 2016 Dec; 70(6):954-960. PubMed ID: 27329565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Outcomes of Active Surveillance after Initial Surveillance Prostate Biopsy.
Kovac E; Lieser G; Elshafei A; Jones JS; Klein EA; Stephenson AJ
J Urol; 2017 Jan; 197(1):84-89. PubMed ID: 27449260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison of biopsy under-sampling and annual progression using hidden markov models to learn from prostate cancer active surveillance studies.
Li W; Denton BT; Nieboer D; Carroll PR; Roobol MJ; Morgan TM;
Cancer Med; 2020 Dec; 9(24):9611-9619. PubMed ID: 33159431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Pathological upgrading in prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance: Does prostate-specific antigen density matter?
Jin BS; Kang SH; Kim DY; Oh HG; Kim CI; Moon GH; Kwon TG; Park JS
Korean J Urol; 2015 Sep; 56(9):624-9. PubMed ID: 26366274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A negative confirmatory biopsy among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer does not protect them from histologic grade progression.
Wong LM; Alibhai SM; Trottier G; Timilshina N; Van der Kwast T; Zlotta A; Lawrentschuk N; Kulkarni G; Hamilton R; Ferrara S; Margel D; Trachtenberg J; Jewett MA; Toi A; Evans A; Fleshner NE; Finelli A
Eur Urol; 2014 Sep; 66(3):406-13. PubMed ID: 23664820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. How Active is Active Surveillance? Intensity of Followup during Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer in the United States.
Loeb S; Walter D; Curnyn C; Gold HT; Lepor H; Makarov DV
J Urol; 2016 Sep; 196(3):721-6. PubMed ID: 26946161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Pathological and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy in men with low-risk prostate cancer meeting the Prostate Cancer International: Active Surveillance criteria.
Mitsuzuka K; Narita S; Koie T; Kaiho Y; Tsuchiya N; Yoneyama T; Kakoi N; Kawamura S; Tochigi T; Habuchi T; Ohyama C; Arai Y
BJU Int; 2013 May; 111(6):914-20. PubMed ID: 23320782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Adherence to Active Surveillance Protocols for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Results of the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Initiative.
Kalapara AA; Verbeek JFM; Nieboer D; Fahey M; Gnanapragasam V; Van Hemelrijck M; Lee LS; Bangma CH; Steyerberg EW; Harkin T; Helleman J; Roobol MJ; Frydenberg M;
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Feb; 3(1):80-91. PubMed ID: 31564531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Predicting Biopsy Outcomes During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: External Validation of the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study Risk Calculators in Five Large Active Surveillance Cohorts.
Drost FH; Nieboer D; Morgan TM; Carroll PR; Roobol MJ;
Eur Urol; 2019 Nov; 76(5):693-702. PubMed ID: 31451332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Consistent Biopsy Quality and Gleason Grading Within the Global Active Surveillance Global Action Plan 3 Initiative: A Prerequisite for Future Studies.
van der Kwast TH; Helleman J; Nieboer D; Bruinsma SM; Roobol MJ; ; Trock B; Ehdaie B; Carroll P; Filson C; Kim J; Logothetis C; Morgan T; Klotz L; Pickles T; Hyndman E; Moore CM; Gnanapragasam V; Van Hemelrijck M; Dasgupta P; Bangma C; Roobol M; Villers A; Rannikko A; Valdagni R; Perry A; Hugosson J; Rubio-Briones J; Bjartell A; Hefermehl L; Shiong LL; Frydenberg M; Kakehi Y; Chung BH; van der Kwast T; Obbink H; van der Linden W; Hulsen T; de Jonge C; Kattan M; Xinge J; Muir K; Lophatananon A; Fahey M; Steyerberg E; Nieboer D; Zhang L; Guo W; Benfante N; Cowan J; Patil D; Tolosa E; Kim TK; Mamedov A; LaPointe V; Crump T; Kimberly-Duffell J; Santaolalla A; Nieboer D; Olivier JT; Rancati T; Ahlgren H; Mascarós J; Löfgren A; Lehmann K; Lin CH; Hirama H; Lee KS; Jenster G; Auvinen A; Bjartell A; Haider M; van Bochove K; Carter B; Gledhill S; Buzza M; Bangma C; Roobol M; Bruinsma S; Helleman J
Eur Urol Oncol; 2019 May; 2(3):333-336. PubMed ID: 31200849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Genomic Prostate Score, PI-RADS™ version 2 and Progression in Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
Kornberg Z; Cowan JE; Westphalen AC; Cooperberg MR; Chan JM; Zhao S; Shinohara K; Carroll PR
J Urol; 2019 Feb; 201(2):300-307. PubMed ID: 30179620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Comparison of Characteristics, Follow-up and Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer According to Ethnicity in the GAP3 Global Consortium Database.
Beckmann K; Santaolalla A; Helleman J; Carroll P; Ha Chung B; Shiong Lee L; Perry A; Rubio-Briones J; Sugimoto M; Trock B; Valdagni R; Dasgupta P; Van Hemelrijck M; Elhage O;
Eur Urol Open Sci; 2021 Dec; 34():47-54. PubMed ID: 34934967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. Analysis of outcomes after radical prostatectomy in patients eligible for active surveillance (PRIAS).
El Hajj A; Ploussard G; de la Taille A; Allory Y; Vordos D; Hoznek A; Abbou CC; Salomon L
BJU Int; 2013 Jan; 111(1):53-9. PubMed ID: 22726582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Older Age Predicts Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Grade Reclassification to Aggressive Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.
Druskin SC; Mamawala M; Tosoian JJ; Epstein JI; Pavlovich CP; Carter HB; Trock BJ
J Urol; 2019 Jan; 201(1):98-104. PubMed ID: 30114397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Population-based study of grade progression in patients who harboured Gleason 3 + 3.
Sampurno F; Earnest A; Millar J; Frydenberg M; Murphy D; Delprado W; Evans S
World J Urol; 2017 Nov; 35(11):1689-1699. PubMed ID: 28500489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Immediate versus delayed radical prostatectomy: updated outcomes following active surveillance of prostate cancer.
Filippou P; Welty CJ; Cowan JE; Perez N; Shinohara K; Carroll PR
Eur Urol; 2015 Sep; 68(3):458-63. PubMed ID: 26138041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Role of Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Clinical Stage in Evaluation of Disease Progression for Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
Chesnut GT; Vertosick EA; Benfante N; Sjoberg DD; Fainberg J; Lee T; Eastham J; Laudone V; Scardino P; Touijer K; Vickers A; Ehdaie B
Eur Urol; 2020 Apr; 77(4):501-507. PubMed ID: 31874726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
