These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
2. Clinical validation of IsoPSA, a single parameter, structure-focused assay for improved detection of prostate cancer: A prospective, multicenter study. Klein EA; Partin A; Lotan Y; Baniel J; Dineen M; Hafron J; Manickam K; Pliskin M; Wagner M; Kestranek A; Stovsky M Urol Oncol; 2022 Sep; 40(9):408.e9-408.e18. PubMed ID: 35840465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The Single-parameter, Structure-based IsoPSA Assay Demonstrates Improved Diagnostic Accuracy for Detection of Any Prostate Cancer and High-grade Prostate Cancer Compared to a Concentration-based Assay of Total Prostate-specific Antigen: A Preliminary Report. Klein EA; Chait A; Hafron JM; Kernen KM; Manickam K; Stephenson AJ; Wagner M; Zhu H; Kestranek A; Zaslavsky B; Stovsky M Eur Urol; 2017 Dec; 72(6):942-949. PubMed ID: 28396176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Elevated IsoPSA Selects for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Without a Preference for Any Particular Adverse Histopathologic or Radiographic Feature. Benidir T; Hofmann M; Lone Z; Nguyen JK; Purysko AS; Stovsky M; Klein EA; Weight CJ Urology; 2022 Oct; 168():150-155. PubMed ID: 35680047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Decision Analysis Model Comparing Cost of IsoPSA™ vs Repeat Biopsy for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men with Previous Negative Findings on Biopsy. Lotan Y; Stovsky M; Rochelle R; Klein E Urol Pract; 2021 Jan; 8(1):40-46. PubMed ID: 37145424 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. IsoPSA Performance Characteristics are Unaffected by 5-Alpha Reductase Inhibitors or Alpha-Blockers: Results From the IsoPSA Validation Study. Scovell JM; Stovsky M; Partin A; Lotan Y; Baniel J; Dineen M; Hafron J; Manickam K; Pliskin M; Wagner M; Kestranek A; Klein EA Urology; 2023 May; 175():132-136. PubMed ID: 36804443 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An Evaluation of Screening Pathways Using a Combination of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-specific Antigen: Results from the IP1-PROSTAGRAM Study. Eldred-Evans D; Tam H; Sokhi H; Padhani AR; Connor M; Price D; Gammon M; Klimowska-Nassar N; Burak P; Day E; Winkler M; Fiorentino F; Ahmed HU Eur Urol Oncol; 2023 Jun; 6(3):295-302. PubMed ID: 37080821 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical Validation of IsoPSA™, a Single Parameter, Structure Based Assay for Improved Detection of High Grade Prostate Cancer. Stovsky M; Klein EA; Chait A; Manickam K; Stephenson AJ; Wagner M; Dineen M; Lotan Y; Partin A; Baniel J; Kestranek A; Gawande P; Boris Zaslavsky J Urol; 2019 Jun; 201(6):1115-1120. PubMed ID: 30810464 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prostate cancer screening practices in a large, integrated health system: 2007-2014. Misra-Hebert AD; Hu B; Klein EA; Stephenson A; Taksler GB; Kattan MW; Rothberg MB BJU Int; 2017 Aug; 120(2):257-264. PubMed ID: 28139034 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Compliance with biopsy recommendations of a prostate cancer risk calculator. van Vugt HA; Roobol MJ; Busstra M; Kil P; Oomens EH; de Jong IJ; Bangma CH; Steyerberg EW; Korfage I BJU Int; 2012 May; 109(10):1480-8. PubMed ID: 21933335 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical utility of the Prostate Health Index (phi) for biopsy decision management in a large group urology practice setting. White J; Shenoy BV; Tutrone RF; Karsh LI; Saltzstein DR; Harmon WJ; Broyles DL; Roddy TE; Lofaro LR; Paoli CJ; Denham D; Reynolds MA Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2018 Apr; 21(1):78-84. PubMed ID: 29158509 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques in aiding the localisation of prostate abnormalities for biopsy: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Mowatt G; Scotland G; Boachie C; Cruickshank M; Ford JA; Fraser C; Kurban L; Lam TB; Padhani AR; Royle J; Scheenen TW; Tassie E Health Technol Assess; 2013 May; 17(20):vii-xix, 1-281. PubMed ID: 23697373 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Selecting men diagnosed with prostate cancer for active surveillance using a risk calculator: a prospective impact study. van Vugt HA; Roobol MJ; van der Poel HG; van Muilekom EH; Busstra M; Kil P; Oomens EH; Leliveld A; Bangma CH; Korfage I; Steyerberg EW BJU Int; 2012 Jul; 110(2):180-7. PubMed ID: 22112199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using decision curve analysis to benchmark performance of a magnetic resonance imaging-based deep learning model for prostate cancer risk assessment. Deniffel D; Abraham N; Namdar K; Dong X; Salinas E; Milot L; Khalvati F; Haider MA Eur Radiol; 2020 Dec; 30(12):6867-6876. PubMed ID: 32591889 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Detecting and Ruling out Gleason 7-10 Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-naïve Men. Boesen L; Nørgaard N; Løgager V; Balslev I; Bisbjerg R; Thestrup KC; Jakobsen H; Thomsen HS Eur Urol Oncol; 2019 May; 2(3):311-319. PubMed ID: 31200846 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Real-world use of MRI for risk stratification prior to prostate biopsy. Siddiqui MR; Ansbro B; Shah PV; Aguiar JA; Li EV; Rich JM; Mahenthiran AK; Moataz SAS; Keeter MK; Mai Q; Mi X; Schaeffer EM; Ross AE Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2023 Jun; 26(2):353-359. PubMed ID: 35551235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Early detection of prostate cancer in Germany: a study using digital rectal examination and 4.0 ng/ml prostate-specific antigen as cutoff. Luboldt HJ; Bex A; Swoboda A; Hüsing J; Rübben H; Eur Urol; 2001 Feb; 39(2):131-7. PubMed ID: 11223671 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The impact of different prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing intervals on Gleason score at diagnosis and the risk of experiencing false-positive biopsy recommendations: a population-based cohort study. Palsdottir T; Nordstrom T; Karlsson A; Grönberg H; Clements M; Eklund M BMJ Open; 2019 Mar; 9(3):e027958. PubMed ID: 30928965 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Combined Clinical Parameters and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Advanced Risk Modeling of Prostate Cancer-Patient-tailored Risk Stratification Can Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies. Radtke JP; Wiesenfarth M; Kesch C; Freitag MT; Alt CD; Celik K; Distler F; Roth W; Wieczorek K; Stock C; Duensing S; Roethke MC; Teber D; Schlemmer HP; Hohenfellner M; Bonekamp D; Hadaschik BA Eur Urol; 2017 Dec; 72(6):888-896. PubMed ID: 28400169 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The "Is mpMRI Enough" or IMRIE Study: A Multicentre Evaluation of Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared with Biopsy. Stonier T; Simson N; Shah T; Lobo N; Amer T; Lee SM; Bass E; Chau E; Grey A; McCartan N; Acher P; Ahmad I; Arumainayagam N; Brown D; Chapman A; Elf D; Hartington T; Ibrahim I; Leung H; Liyanage S; Lovegrove C; Malthouse T; Mateen B; Mistry K; Morrison I; Nalagatla S; Persad R; Pope A; Sokhi H; Syed H; Tadtayev S; Tharmaratnam M; Qteishat A; Miah S; Emberton M; Moore C; Walton T; Eddy B; Ahmed HU Eur Urol Focus; 2021 Sep; 7(5):1027-1034. PubMed ID: 33046412 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]