Literature DB >> 26304009

Prostate cancer: A simplified prostate cancer grading system.

Eric H Kim1, Gerald L Andriole1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2015        PMID： 26304009     DOI： 10.1038/nrurol.2015.212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Urol        ISSN： 1759-4812            Impact factor:   14.432


× No keyword cloud information.
  10 in total

1.  Perception of cancer and inconsistency in medical information are associated with decisional conflict: a pilot study of men with prostate cancer who undergo active surveillance.

Authors:  Alvin C Goh; Marc A Kowalkowski; Donald E Bailey; Meredith W Kazer; Sara J Knight; David M Latini
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 2.  The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; William C Allsbrook; Mahul B Amin; Lars L Egevad
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.394

3.  Gleason 6 prostate tumors diagnosed in the PSA era do not demonstrate the capacity for metastatic spread at the time of radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Nicholas M Donin; Juliana Laze; Ming Zhou; Qinghu Ren; Herbert Lepor
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Patients with Biopsy Gleason 9 and 10 Prostate Cancer Have Significantly Worse Outcomes Compared to Patients with Gleason 8 Disease.

Authors:  Che-Kai Tsao; Kathryn P Gray; Mari Nakabayashi; Carolyn Evan; Philip W Kantoff; Jiaoti Huang; Matthew D Galsky; Mark Pomerantz; William K Oh
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-01-24       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update.

Authors:  A W Partin; M W Kattan; E N Subong; P C Walsh; K J Wojno; J E Oesterling; P T Scardino; J D Pearson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  T Y Chan; A W Partin; P C Walsh; J I Epstein
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Uncertainty and perception of danger among patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Meredith Wallace Kazer; Donald E Bailey; Jonathan Chipman; Sarah P Psutka; Jill Hardy; Larry Hembroff; Meredith Regan; Rodney L Dunn; Catrina Crociani; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; D Schultz; K Blank; G A Broderick; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; I Kaplan; C J Beard; A Wein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  A Contemporary Prostate Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; Michael J Zelefsky; Daniel D Sjoberg; Joel B Nelson; Lars Egevad; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Andrew J Vickers; Anil V Parwani; Victor E Reuter; Samson W Fine; James A Eastham; Peter Wiklund; Misop Han; Chandana A Reddy; Jay P Ciezki; Tommy Nyberg; Eric A Klein
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-07-10       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Prostate-specific antigen-based screening: controversy and guidelines.

Authors:  Eric H Kim; Gerald L Andriole
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 8.775
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.