BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38051029)

  • 1. Biparametric Quantitative MRI for Prostate Cancer Detection.
    Uyanik M; Vigneswaran HT; Hale GR; Gann P; Magin R; Abern MR
    Top Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 Dec; 32(6):66-72. PubMed ID: 38051029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Head-to-head comparison of biparametric versus multiparametric MRI of the prostate before robot-assisted transperineal fusion prostate biopsy.
    Thaiss WM; Moser S; Hepp T; Kruck S; Rausch S; Scharpf M; Nikolaou K; Stenzl A; Bedke J; Kaufmann S
    World J Urol; 2022 Oct; 40(10):2431-2438. PubMed ID: 35922717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Can high b-value 3.0 T biparametric MRI with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) be used in biopsy-naïve men?
    Wang G; Yu G; Chen J; Yang G; Xu H; Chen Z; Wang G; Bai Z
    Clin Imaging; 2022 Aug; 88():80-86. PubMed ID: 34243992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Prospective comparison of a fast 1.5-T biparametric with the 3.0-T multiparametric ESUR magnetic resonance imaging protocol as a triage test for men at risk of prostate cancer.
    Van Nieuwenhove S; Saussez TP; Thiry S; Trefois P; Annet L; Michoux N; Lecouvet F; Tombal B
    BJU Int; 2019 Mar; 123(3):411-420. PubMed ID: 30240059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Biparametric 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging for prostatic cancer detection in a biopsy-naïve patient population: a further improvement of PI-RADS v2?
    Stanzione A; Imbriaco M; Cocozza S; Fusco F; Rusconi G; Nappi C; Mirone V; Mangiapia F; Brunetti A; Ragozzino A; Longo N
    Eur J Radiol; 2016 Dec; 85(12):2269-2274. PubMed ID: 27842676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Can Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies in men with PSA levels of 4-10 ng/ml?
    Xu N; Wu YP; Chen DN; Ke ZB; Cai H; Wei Y; Zheng QS; Huang JB; Li XD; Xue XY
    J Cancer Res Clin Oncol; 2018 May; 144(5):987-995. PubMed ID: 29504080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. MR-sequences for prostate cancer diagnostics: validation based on the PI-RADS scoring system and targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy.
    Schimmöller L; Quentin M; Arsov C; Hiester A; Buchbender C; Rabenalt R; Albers P; Antoch G; Blondin D
    Eur Radiol; 2014 Oct; 24(10):2582-9. PubMed ID: 24972954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Scores to Select an Optimal Prostate Biopsy Method: A Secondary Analysis of the Trio Study.
    Ahdoot M; Lebastchi AH; Long L; Wilbur AR; Gomella PT; Mehralivand S; Daneshvar MA; Yerram NK; O'Connor LP; Wang AZ; Gurram S; Bloom J; Siddiqui MM; Linehan WM; Merino M; Choyke PL; Pinsky P; Parnes H; Shih JH; Turkbey B; Wood BJ; Pinto PA;
    Eur Urol Oncol; 2022 Apr; 5(2):176-186. PubMed ID: 33846112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Prospective PI-RADS v2.1 Atypical Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Nodules With Marked Restricted Diffusion: Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer on Multiparametric MRI.
    Costa DN; Jia L; Subramanian N; Xi Y; Rofsky NM; Recchimuzzi DZ; de Leon AD; Arraj P; Pedrosa I
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Aug; 217(2):395-403. PubMed ID: 32876473
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Prevalence of Prostate Cancer in PI-RADS Version 2.1 Transition Zone Atypical Nodules Upgraded by Abnormal DWI: Correlation With MRI-Directed TRUS-Guided Targeted Biopsy.
    Lim CS; Abreu-Gomez J; Carrion I; Schieda N
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Mar; 216(3):683-690. PubMed ID: 32755208
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Contribution of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced and Diffusion MRI to PI-RADS for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.
    Tavakoli AA; Hielscher T; Badura P; Görtz M; Kuder TA; Gnirs R; Schwab C; Hohenfellner M; Schlemmer HP; Bonekamp D
    Radiology; 2023 Jan; 306(1):186-199. PubMed ID: 35972360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Multicentre evaluation of targeted and systematic biopsies using magnetic resonance and ultrasound image-fusion guided transperineal prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy.
    Hansen NL; Kesch C; Barrett T; Koo B; Radtke JP; Bonekamp D; Schlemmer HP; Warren AY; Wieczorek K; Hohenfellner M; Kastner C; Hadaschik B
    BJU Int; 2017 Nov; 120(5):631-638. PubMed ID: 27862869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. [Analysis of the relationship between PI-RADS scores and the pathological results of targeted biopsy based on MRI].
    Wang YM; Shang JW; Dong L; Liang LH; Zhao RZ; Liang C; Wang SQ; Xia W; Cheng G; Hua LX
    Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2023 Nov; 45(11):942-947. PubMed ID: 37968079
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Avoiding Unnecessary Systematic Biopsy in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Comparison Between MRI-Based Radiomics Model and PI-RADS Category.
    Cheng X; Chen Y; Xu H; Ye L; Tong S; Li H; Zhang T; Tian S; Qi J; Zeng H; Yao J; Song B
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 Feb; 57(2):578-586. PubMed ID: 35852438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Role of PSA Density among PI-RADS v2.1 Categories to Avoid an Unnecessary Transition Zone Biopsy in Patients with PSA 4-20 ng/mL.
    Wang ZB; Wei CG; Zhang YY; Pan P; Dai GC; Tu J; Shen JK
    Biomed Res Int; 2021; 2021():3995789. PubMed ID: 34671673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Predictors of prostate cancer detection in MRI PI-RADS 3 lesions - Reality of a tertiary center.
    Araújo D; Gromicho A; Dias J; Bastos S; Maciel RM; Sabença A; Xambre L
    Arch Ital Urol Androl; 2023 Dec; 95(4):11830. PubMed ID: 38117217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Multicentre evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging supported transperineal prostate biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with suspicion of prostate cancer.
    Hansen NL; Barrett T; Kesch C; Pepdjonovic L; Bonekamp D; O'Sullivan R; Distler F; Warren A; Samel C; Hadaschik B; Grummet J; Kastner C
    BJU Int; 2018 Jul; 122(1):40-49. PubMed ID: 29024425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prospective nonrandomized study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy to magnetic resonance imaging with subsequent MRI-guided biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients.
    Castellucci R; Linares Quevedo AI; Sánchez Gómez FJ; Díez Rodríguez J; Cogorno L; Cogollos Acuña I; Salmerón Béliz I; Muñoz Fernández de Legaría M; Martínez Piñeiro L
    Minerva Urol Nefrol; 2017 Dec; 69(6):589-595. PubMed ID: 29094851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.