116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35288662)
1. Evaluation of selective bone scan staging in prostate cancer - external validation of current strategies and decision-curve analysis.
Hiwase MD; Jay A; Bulamu N; Teh J; Paterson F; Kichenadasse G; Vincent AD; O'Callaghan M;
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2022 Feb; 25(2):336-343. PubMed ID: 35288662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of a novel risk stratification tool.
De Nunzio C; Leonardo C; Franco G; Esperto F; Brassetti A; Simonelli G; Dente D; De Dominicis C; Tubaro A
World J Urol; 2013 Apr; 31(2):365-9. PubMed ID: 22576696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Establishing the pathways and indications for performing isotope bone scans in newly diagnosed intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer - results from a large contemporaneous cohort.
KandaSwamy GV; Bennett A; Narahari K; Hughes O; Rees J; Kynaston H
BJU Int; 2017 Nov; 120(5B):E59-E63. PubMed ID: 28317247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of the currently available guidelines and proposal of a novel risk stratification tool.
Briganti A; Passoni N; Ferrari M; Capitanio U; Suardi N; Gallina A; Da Pozzo LF; Picchio M; Di Girolamo V; Salonia A; Gianolli L; Messa C; Rigatti P; Montorsi F
Eur Urol; 2010 Apr; 57(4):551-8. PubMed ID: 20034730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison of prostate cancer prediction models in men undergoing both magnetic resonance imaging and transperineal biopsy: Are the models still relevant?
Doan P; Graham P; Lahoud J; Remmers S; Roobol MJ; Kim L; Patel MI
BJU Int; 2021 Dec; 128 Suppl 3():36-44. PubMed ID: 34374190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. More advantages in detecting bone and soft tissue metastases from prostate cancer using
Pianou NK; Stavrou PZ; Vlontzou E; Rondogianni P; Exarhos DN; Datseris IE
Hell J Nucl Med; 2019; 22(1):6-9. PubMed ID: 30843003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prediction of Prostate Cancer: External Validation of the ERSPC Risk Calculator in a Contemporary Dutch Clinical Cohort.
Gayet M; Mannaerts CK; Nieboer D; Beerlage HP; Wijkstra H; Mulders PFA; Roobol MJ
Eur Urol Focus; 2018 Mar; 4(2):228-234. PubMed ID: 28753781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent.
Mottet N; Bellmunt J; Bolla M; Briers E; Cumberbatch MG; De Santis M; Fossati N; Gross T; Henry AM; Joniau S; Lam TB; Mason MD; Matveev VB; Moldovan PC; van den Bergh RCN; Van den Broeck T; van der Poel HG; van der Kwast TH; Rouvière O; Schoots IG; Wiegel T; Cornford P
Eur Urol; 2017 Apr; 71(4):618-629. PubMed ID: 27568654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Rotterdam mobile phone app including MRI data for the prediction of prostate cancer: A multicenter external validation.
De Nunzio C; Lombardo R; Baldassarri V; Cindolo L; Bertolo R; Minervini A; Sessa F; Muto G; Bove P; Vittori M; Bozzini G; Castellan P; Mugavero F; Falsaperla M; Schips L; Celia A; Bada M; Porreca A; Pastore A; Al Salhi Y; Giampaoli M; Novella G; Rizzetto R; Trabacchin N; Mantica G; Pini G; Remmers S; Antonelli A; Tubaro A
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2021 Oct; 47(10):2640-2645. PubMed ID: 33965292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A novel nomogram to identify candidates for active surveillance amongst patients with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 1 or ISUP GG2 prostate cancer, according to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings.
Luzzago S; de Cobelli O; Cozzi G; Peveri G; Bagnardi V; Catellani M; Di Trapani E; Mistretta FA; Pricolo P; Conti A; Alessi S; Marvaso G; Ferro M; Matei DV; Renne G; Jereczek-Fossa BA; Petralia G; Musi G
BJU Int; 2020 Jul; 126(1):104-113. PubMed ID: 32150328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. External validation and comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-based predictive models for clinically significant prostate cancer.
Lee HJ; Lee A; Yang XY; Law YM; Huang HH; Lau WK; Lee LS; Ho HS; Cheng CW; Yuen JS; Tay KJ; Chen K
Urol Oncol; 2021 Nov; 39(11):783.e1-783.e10. PubMed ID: 33775528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. External validation of novel magnetic resonance imaging-based models for prostate cancer prediction.
Püllen L; Radtke JP; Wiesenfarth M; Roobol MJ; Verbeek JFM; Wetter A; Guberina N; Pandey A; Hüttenbrink C; Tschirdewahn S; Pahernik S; Hadaschik BA; Distler FA
BJU Int; 2020 Mar; 125(3):407-416. PubMed ID: 31758738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prostate cancer risk prediction using the novel versions of the European Randomised Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators: independent validation and comparison in a contemporary European cohort.
Poyet C; Nieboer D; Bhindi B; Kulkarni GS; Wiederkehr C; Wettstein MS; Largo R; Wild P; Sulser T; Hermanns T
BJU Int; 2016 Mar; 117(3):401-8. PubMed ID: 26332503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Risk Stratification of Patients Candidate to Radical Prostatectomy Based on Clinical and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters: Development and External Validation of Novel Risk Groups.
Mazzone E; Gandaglia G; Ploussard G; Marra G; Valerio M; Campi R; Mari A; Minervini A; Serni S; Moschini M; Marquis A; Beauval JB; van den Bergh R; Rahota RG; Soeterik T; Roumiguiè M; Afferi L; Zhuang J; Guo H; Mattei A; Gontero P; Cucchiara V; Stabile A; Fossati N; Montorsi F; Briganti A
Eur Urol; 2022 Feb; 81(2):193-203. PubMed ID: 34399996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Avoiding Unnecessary Biopsy: MRI-based Risk Models versus a PI-RADS and PSA Density Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.
Deniffel D; Healy GM; Dong X; Ghai S; Salinas-Miranda E; Fleshner N; Hamilton R; Kulkarni G; Toi A; van der Kwast T; Zlotta A; Finelli A; Perlis N; Haider MA
Radiology; 2021 Aug; 300(2):369-379. PubMed ID: 34032510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013.
Heidenreich A; Bastian PJ; Bellmunt J; Bolla M; Joniau S; van der Kwast T; Mason M; Matveev V; Wiegel T; Zattoni F; Mottet N;
Eur Urol; 2014 Jan; 65(1):124-37. PubMed ID: 24207135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Factors Influencing Selection of Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer.
Liu J; Womble PR; Merdan S; Miller DC; Montie JE; Denton BT;
Urology; 2015 Nov; 86(5):901-5. PubMed ID: 26358397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Development and Validation of a Lookup Table for the Prediction of Metastatic Prostate Cancer According to Prostatic-specific Antigen Value, Clinical Tumor Stage, and Gleason Grade Groups.
Preisser F; Bandini M; Nazzani S; Mazzone E; Marchioni M; Tian Z; Chun FKH; Saad F; Briganti A; Haese A; Montorsi F; Huland H; Graefen M; Tilki D; Karakiewicz PI
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Oct; 3(5):631-639. PubMed ID: 31411975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Serum prostate-specific antigen as a predictor of radiographic staging studies in newly diagnosed prostate cancer.
Huncharek M; Muscat J
Cancer Invest; 1995; 13(1):31-5. PubMed ID: 7530590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
