112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35468226)
21. The effect of multiplicity of PI-RADS 3 lesions on cancer detection rate of confirmatory targeted biopsy in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer and managed with active surveillance.
Yaguchi G; Tang HJ; Deebajah M; Keeley J; Pantelic M; Williamson S; Gupta N; Peabody JO; Menon M; Dabaja A; Alanee S
Urol Oncol; 2020 Jun; 38(6):599.e9-599.e13. PubMed ID: 32265090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Targeted prostate biopsy in select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply?
Hu JC; Chang E; Natarajan S; Margolis DJ; Macairan M; Lieu P; Huang J; Sonn G; Dorey FJ; Marks LS
J Urol; 2014 Aug; 192(2):385-90. PubMed ID: 24512956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-directed Biopsy Strategies for Changing the Paradigm of Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.
Schoots IG; Padhani AR; Rouvière O; Barentsz JO; Richenberg J
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Feb; 3(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 31706946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. 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]
25. 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]
26. 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]
27. The Efficacy of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Risk Classification for Patients with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.
Recabal P; Assel M; Sjoberg DD; Lee D; Laudone VP; Touijer K; Eastham JA; Vargas HA; Coleman J; Ehdaie B
J Urol; 2016 Aug; 196(2):374-81. PubMed ID: 26920465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men: The Biparametric MRI for Detection of Prostate Cancer (BIDOC) Study.
Boesen L; Nørgaard N; Løgager V; Balslev I; Bisbjerg R; Thestrup KC; Winther MD; Jakobsen H; Thomsen HS
JAMA Netw Open; 2018 Jun; 1(2):e180219. PubMed ID: 30646066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Further reduction of disqualification rates by additional MRI-targeted biopsy with transperineal saturation biopsy compared with standard 12-core systematic biopsies for the selection of prostate cancer patients for active surveillance.
Radtke JP; Kuru TH; Bonekamp D; Freitag MT; Wolf MB; Alt CD; Hatiboglu G; Boxler S; Pahernik S; Roth W; Roethke MC; Schlemmer HP; Hohenfellner M; Hadaschik BA
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2016 Sep; 19(3):283-91. PubMed ID: 27184812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Prostate Indeterminate Lesions on Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Biopsy Versus Surveillance: A Literature Review.
Gómez Rivas J; Giganti F; Álvarez-Maestro M; Freire MJ; Kasivisvanathan V; Martinez-Piñeiro L; Emberton M
Eur Urol Focus; 2019 Sep; 5(5):799-806. PubMed ID: 29525382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Prostate cancer upgrading with serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging and repeat biopsy in men on active surveillance: are confirmatory biopsies still necessary?
Osses DF; Drost FH; Verbeek JFM; Luiting HB; van Leenders GJLH; Bangma CH; Krestin GP; Roobol MJ; Schoots IG
BJU Int; 2020 Jul; 126(1):124-132. PubMed ID: 32232921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Multiparametric MRI to improve detection of prostate cancer compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy alone: the PROMIS study.
Brown LC; Ahmed HU; Faria R; El-Shater Bosaily A; Gabe R; Kaplan RS; Parmar M; Collaco-Moraes Y; Ward K; Hindley RG; Freeman A; Kirkham A; Oldroyd R; Parker C; Bott S; Burns-Cox N; Dudderidge T; Ghei M; Henderson A; Persad R; Rosario DJ; Shergill I; Winkler M; Soares M; Spackman E; Sculpher M; Emberton M
Health Technol Assess; 2018 Jul; 22(39):1-176. PubMed ID: 30040065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Prediction of High-grade Prostate Cancer Following Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Improving the Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators.
Alberts AR; Roobol MJ; Verbeek JFM; Schoots IG; Chiu PK; Osses DF; Tijsterman JD; Beerlage HP; Mannaerts CK; Schimmöller L; Albers P; Arsov C
Eur Urol; 2019 Feb; 75(2):310-318. PubMed ID: 30082150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy Improves Selection of Patients Considered for Active Surveillance for Clinically Low Risk Prostate Cancer Based on Systematic Biopsies.
Ouzzane A; Renard-Penna R; Marliere F; Mozer P; Olivier J; Barkatz J; Puech P; Villers A
J Urol; 2015 Aug; 194(2):350-6. PubMed ID: 25747105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Diagnostic performance of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsies vs. systematic prostate biopsies in biopsy-naïve, previous negative biopsy patients and men undergoing active surveillance.
Borghesi M; Bianchi L; Barbaresi U; Vagnoni V; Corcioni B; Gaudiano C; Fiorentino M; Giunchi F; Chessa F; Garofalo M; Bertaccini A; Angelini S; Ercolino A; Casablanca C; Droghetti M; Golfieri R; Schiavina R
Minerva Urol Nephrol; 2021 Jun; 73(3):357-366. PubMed ID: 33769008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Prognostic value of a cell-cycle progression score in men with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance after MRI-guided prostate biopsy--a pilot study.
Arsov C; Jankowiak F; Hiester A; Rabenalt R; Quentin M; Schimmöller L; Blondin D; Antoch G; Albers P
Anticancer Res; 2014 May; 34(5):2459-66. PubMed ID: 24778061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. Effect of information on prostate biopsy history on biopsy outcomes in the era of MRI-targeted biopsies.
Lantz A; Haug ES; Picker W; Crippa A; Jäderling F; Mortezavi A; Nordström T
World J Urol; 2021 Apr; 39(4):1153-1159. PubMed ID: 32472278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Relationship Between Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Biopsy Indication, and MRI-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy Outcomes.
Meng X; Rosenkrantz AB; Mendhiratta N; Fenstermaker M; Huang R; Wysock JS; Bjurlin MA; Marshall S; Deng FM; Zhou M; Melamed J; Huang WC; Lepor H; Taneja SS
Eur Urol; 2016 Mar; 69(3):512-7. PubMed ID: 26112001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Reliability of Serial Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression During Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Rajwa P; Pradere B; Quhal F; Mori K; Laukhtina E; Huebner NA; D'Andrea D; Krzywon A; Shim SR; Baltzer PA; Renard-Penna R; Leapman MS; Shariat SF; Ploussard G
Eur Urol; 2021 Nov; 80(5):549-563. PubMed ID: 34020828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
