Literature DB >> 25769986

Future-proofing Gleason Grading: What to Call Gleason 6 Prostate Cancer?

Stacy Loeb1, Francesco Montorsi2, James W Catto3.   

Abstract

At the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology meeting, changes to prostate cancer grading were discussed including new prognostic Gleason grade groups 1-5 representing Gleason scores of 3+3, 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10, respectively.
Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2015        PMID： 25769986      PMCID： PMC4475465          DOI： 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.02.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN： 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  13 in total

1.  Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Paul R Womble; James E Montie; Zaojun Ye; Susan M Linsell; Brian R Lane; David C Miller
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-08-24       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  The emotional burden of low-risk prostate cancer: proposal for a change in nomenclature.

Authors:  Oliver Sartor; D Lynn Loriaux
Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.872

3.  Gleason score 6 adenocarcinoma: should it be labeled as cancer?

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; Bruce J Trock; Robert W Veltri; William G Nelson; Donald S Coffey; Eric A Singer; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Immediate risk of suicide and cardiovascular death after a prostate cancer diagnosis: cohort study in the United States.

Authors:  Fang Fang; Nancy L Keating; Lorelei A Mucci; Hans-Olov Adami; Meir J Stampfer; Unnur Valdimarsdóttir; Katja Fall
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change.

Authors:  Laura J Esserman; Ian M Thompson; Brian Reid; Peter Nelson; David F Ransohoff; H Gilbert Welch; Shelley Hwang; Donald A Berry; Kenneth W Kinzler; William C Black; Mina Bissell; Howard Parnes; Sudhir Srivastava
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 6.  Risk of Gleason grade inaccuracies in prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance.

Authors:  Ronald H Shapiro; Peter A S Johnstone
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Population based study of use and determinants of active surveillance and watchful waiting for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Anders Berglund; Pär Stattin
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-05-30       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Tracking the clonal origin of lethal prostate cancer.

Authors:  Michael C Haffner; Timothy Mosbruger; David M Esopi; Helen Fedor; Christopher M Heaphy; David A Walker; Nkosi Adejola; Meltem Gürel; Jessica Hicks; Alan K Meeker; Marc K Halushka; Jonathan W Simons; William B Isaacs; Angelo M De Marzo; William G Nelson; Srinivasan Yegnasubramanian
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 14.808

9.  Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Morgan R Pokorny; Maarten de Rooij; Earl Duncan; Fritz H Schröder; Robert Parkinson; Jelle O Barentsz; Leslie C Thompson
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Suitability of PSA-detected localised prostate cancers for focal therapy: experience from the ProtecT study.

Authors:  J W F Catto; M C Robinson; P C Albertsen; J R Goepel; M F Abbod; D A Linkens; M Davis; D J Rosario; A Y Warren; M Varma; D F Griffiths; K M Grigor; N J Mayer; J D Oxley; N S Deshmukh; J A Lane; C Metcalfe; J L Donovan; D E Neal; F C Hamdy
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 7.640
View more
  5 in total

1.  Perspectives of Prostate Cancer Patients on Gleason Scores and the New Grade Groups: Initial Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Caitlin Curnyn; Erica Sedlander
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  It's all in the name: Does nomenclature for indolent prostate cancer impact management and anxiety?

Authors:  Matthew T Hudnall; Anuj S Desai; Kyle P Tsai; Adam B Weiner; Amanda X Vo; Oliver S Ko; Stephen Jan; Edward M Schaeffer; Shilajit D Kundu
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 6.921

3.  Two-dimensional neovascular complexity is significantly higher in nontumor prostate tissue than in low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Gianluigi Taverna; Fabio Grizzi; Piergiuseppe Colombo; Mauro Seveso; Guido Giusti; Silvia Proietti; Girolamo Fiorini; Giovanni Lughezzani; Paolo Casale; Nicolò Buffi; Massimo Lazzari; Giorgio Guazzoni
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2015-06-02

Review 4.  MicroRNAs as Biomarkers for Diagnosis, Prognosis and Theranostics in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Gloria Bertoli; Claudia Cava; Isabella Castiglioni
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Improving Clinical Risk Stratification at Diagnosis in Primary Prostate Cancer: A Prognostic Modelling Study.

Authors:  Vincent J Gnanapragasam; Artitaya Lophatananon; Karen A Wright; Kenneth R Muir; Anna Gavin; David C Greenberg
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 11.069
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.