137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37667393)
1. A nomogram based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve patients.
Hu B; Zhang H; Zhang Y; Jin Y
Cancer Imaging; 2023 Sep; 23(1):82. PubMed ID: 37667393
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Derived Nomogram to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer by Targeted Biopsy for Index Lesion.
Kim MJ; Park SY
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2022 Apr; 55(4):1226-1233. PubMed ID: 34296803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. MRI combined with PSA density in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL: Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI.
Han C; Liu S; Qin XB; Ma S; Zhu LN; Wang XY
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2020 Apr; 101(4):235-244. PubMed ID: 32063483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. An integrated nomogram combining deep learning, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scoring, and clinical variables for identification of clinically significant prostate cancer on biparametric MRI: a retrospective multicentre study.
Hiremath A; Shiradkar R; Fu P; Mahran A; Rastinehad AR; Tewari A; Tirumani SH; Purysko A; Ponsky L; Madabhushi A
Lancet Digit Health; 2021 Jul; 3(7):e445-e454. PubMed ID: 34167765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Development and validation of a nomogram based on biparametric MRI PI-RADS v2.1 and clinical parameters to avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies.
Wang Y; Wang L; Tang X; Zhang Y; Zhang N; Zhi B; Niu X
BMC Med Imaging; 2023 Aug; 23(1):106. PubMed ID: 37582697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection After a Negative Prebiopsy MRI Examination: Comparison of Biparametric Versus Multiparametric MRI.
Gan JM; Kikano EG; Smith DA; Rao S; Podury R; Wang M; Durieux JC; Paspulati RM; Ponsky L; Ramaiya NH; Tirumani SH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 May; 218(5):859-866. PubMed ID: 34817189
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Modified Predictive Model and Nomogram by Incorporating Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Clinical Indicators for Prostate Biopsy Decision Making.
Pan JF; Su R; Cao JZ; Zhao ZY; Ren DW; Ye SZ; Huang RD; Tao ZL; Yu CL; Jiang JH; Ma Q
Front Oncol; 2021; 11():740868. PubMed ID: 34589437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Added value of systematic biopsy in men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing biparametric MRI-targeted biopsy: multi-institutional external validation study.
Falagario U; Jambor I; Taimen P; Syvänen KT; Kähkönen E; Merisaari H; Montoya Perez I; Knaapila J; Steiner A; Verho J; Tewari A; Aronen HJ; Carrieri G; Boström PJ; Ettala O
World J Urol; 2021 Jun; 39(6):1879-1887. PubMed ID: 32778912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Detection of Prostate Cancer Using Biparametric Prostate MRI, Radiomics, and Kallikreins: A Retrospective Multicenter Study of Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer.
Montoya Perez I; Merisaari H; Jambor I; Ettala O; Taimen P; Knaapila J; Kekki H; Khan FL; Syrjälä E; Steiner A; Syvänen KT; Verho J; Seppänen M; Rannikko A; Riikonen J; Mirtti T; Lamminen T; Saunavaara J; Falagario U; Martini A; Pahikkala T; Pettersson K; Boström PJ; Aronen HJ
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2022 Feb; 55(2):465-477. PubMed ID: 34227169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analysis of risk factors for determining the need for prostate biopsy in patients with negative MRI.
Liang L; Qi F; Cheng Y; Zhang L; Cao D; Cheng G; Hua L
Sci Rep; 2021 Mar; 11(1):6048. PubMed ID: 33723287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How to make clinical decisions to avoid unnecessary prostate screening in biopsy-naïve men with PI-RADs v2 score ≤ 3?
Zhang Y; Zeng N; Zhang F; Huang Y; Tian Y
Int J Clin Oncol; 2020 Jan; 25(1):175-186. PubMed ID: 31473884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Development of a nomogram combining multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and PSA-related parameters to enhance the detection of clinically significant cancer across different region.
Zhou Z; Liang Z; Zuo Y; Zhou Y; Yan W; Wu X; Ji Z; Li H; Hu M; Ma L
Prostate; 2022 Apr; 82(5):556-565. PubMed ID: 35098557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. A predictive model based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical parameters for improved risk assessment and selection of biopsy-naïve men for prostate biopsies.
Boesen L; Thomsen FB; Nørgaard N; Løgager V; Balslev I; Bisbjerg R; Thomsen HS; Jakobsen H
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2019 Dec; 22(4):609-616. PubMed ID: 30988407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Qualitative and Quantitative Reporting of a Unique Biparametric MRI: Towards Biparametric MRI-Based Nomograms for Prediction of Prostate Biopsy Outcome in Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer (IMPROD and MULTI-IMPROD Trials).
Perez IM; Jambor I; Kauko T; Verho J; Ettala O; Falagario U; Merisaari H; Kiviniemi A; Taimen P; Syvänen KT; Knaapila J; Seppänen M; Rannikko A; Riikonen J; Kallajoki M; Mirtti T; Lamminen T; Saunavaara J; Pahikkala T; Boström PJ; Aronen HJ
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 May; 51(5):1556-1567. PubMed ID: 31750988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of biparametric and multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.
Xu L; Zhang G; Shi B; Liu Y; Zou T; Yan W; Xiao Y; Xue H; Feng F; Lei J; Jin Z; Sun H
Cancer Imaging; 2019 Dec; 19(1):90. PubMed ID: 31864408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Negative Predictive Value of Biparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Significant Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Data Analysis Based on Clinical Data from Four Prospective, Registered Studies.
Knaapila J; Jambor I; Ettala O; Taimen P; Verho J; Perez IM; Kiviniemi A; Pahikkala T; Merisaari H; Lamminen T; Saunavaara J; Aronen HJ; Syvänen KT; Boström PJ
Eur Urol Focus; 2021 May; 7(3):522-531. PubMed ID: 32418878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prebiopsy bpMRI and hematological parameter-based risk scoring model for predicting outcomes in biopsy-naive men with PSA 4-20 ng/mL.
Zheng Y; Li W; Zhang Y; Zhang C; Wang J; Ge P
Sci Rep; 2022 Dec; 12(1):21895. PubMed ID: 36536031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prebiopsy IMPROD Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-Specific Antigen Density in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: An External Validation Study.
Knaapila J; Jambor I; Perez IM; Ettala O; Taimen P; Verho J; Kiviniemi A; Pahikkala T; Merisaari H; Lamminen T; Saunavaara J; Aronen HJ; Syvänen KT; Boström PJ
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Oct; 3(5):648-656. PubMed ID: 31501082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
