SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Herman CM,Kattan MW,Ohori M, et al. Primary Gleason pattern as a predictor of disease progression in Gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001; 25: 657660.
  • 2
    Lerner SE,Blute ML,Bergstralh EJ, et al. Analysis of risk factors for progression in patients with pathologically confined prostate cancers after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 1996; 156: 137143.
  • 3
    Roehl KA,Han M,Ramos CG, et al. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results. Urology. 2004; 172: 910914.
  • 4
    Chan TY,Partin AW,Walsh PC, et al. Prognostic significance of Gleason score 3+4 versus Gleason score 4+3 tumor at radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2000; 56: 823827.
  • 5
    Sakr WA,Tefilli MV,Grignon DJ, et al. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: a heterogenous entity? Correlation with pathologic parameters and disease-free survival. Urology. 2000; 56: 730734.
  • 6
    D'Amico AV,Renshaw AA,Schultz D, et al. The impact of the biopsy Gleason score on PSA outcome for prostate cancer patients with PSA ≤ 10 ng/mL and T1c,2a: implications for patient selection for prostate-only therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999; 45: 847851.
  • 7
    Merrick GM,Butler WM,Wallner KE, et al. The impact of primary Gleason grade on biochemical outcome following brachytherapy for hormone-naïve Gleason score 7 prostate cancer. Cancer J. 2005; 11: 234240.
  • 8
    Tollefson MK,Leibovich BC,Slezak JM, et al. Long-term prognostic significance of primary Gleason pattern in patients with Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: impact on prostate cancer specific survival. J Urol. 2006; 175: 547551.
  • 9
    Partin AW,Mangold LA,Lamm DM, et al. Contemporary update or prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin tables) for the new millennium. Urology. 2001; 58: 843848.
  • 10
    Tefilli MV,Gheiler EL,Tiguert R, et al. Should Gleason score 7 prostate cancer be considered a unique grade category?. Urology. 1999; 53: 372377.
  • 11
    Groll R,Fleshner NE,Sugar L, et al. Clinical significance of biopsy-derived primary Gleason score among radical prostatectomy candidates with Gleason 7 tumors. Urology. 2002; 59: 551554.
  • 12
    Vira M,Tomaszewski J,Hwang W, et al. Impact of the percentage of positive biopsy cores on the further stratification of primary grade 3 and grade 4 Gleason score 7 tumors in radical prostatectomy patients. Urology. 2005; 66: 10151019.
  • 13
    Potters L,Purrazzella R,Brustein S, et al. The prognostic significance of Gleason grade in patients treated with permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 56: 749754.
  • 14
    Anderson PR,Hanlon AL,Horwitz E, et al. Outcome and predictive factors for patients with Gleason score 7 prostate carcinoma treatment with three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy. Cancer. 2000; 89: 25652569.
  • 15
    Merrick GS,Butler WM,Wallner KE, et al. Modified uniform seed loading for prostate brachytherapy: rationale, design and evaluation. Tech Urol. 2000; 6: 7884.
  • 16
    Merrick GS,Butler WM,Wallner KE, et al. Extracapsular radiation dose distribution following permanent prostate brachytherapy. Am J Clin Oncol. 2003; 26: E178E189.
  • 17
    Nath R,Anderson LL,Luxton G, et al. Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: recommendations for the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 43. Med Phys. 1995; 22: 209234.
  • 18
    Merrick GS,Wallner KE,Butler WM. Permanent interstitial brachytherapy for the management of carcinoma of the prostate gland. J Urol. 2003; 169: 16431652.
  • 19
    Merrick GS,Butler WM,Wallner KE, et al. Influence of body mass index on biochemical outcome after permanent prostate brachytherapy. Urology. 2005; 65: 95100.
  • 20
    Thompson IM,Tangen CM,Paradelo J, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006; 296: 23292335.
  • 21
    Do TM,Parker RG,Smith RB, et al. High-grade carcinoma of the prostate: a comparison of current local therapies. Urology. 2001; 57: 11211127.
  • 22
    Valicenti R,Lu J,Pilepich M, et al. Survival advantage from higher-dose radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer treated in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trials. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18: 27402746.
  • 23
    Martinez AA,Gustafson G,Gonazales J, et al. Dose escalation using conformal high-dose rate brachytherapy improves outcome in unfavorable prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002; 53: 316327.
  • 24
    D'Amico AV,Witthington R,Malkowicz, SB, et al. A prostate gland volume of more than 75 cm3 predicts for a favorable outcome after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. Urology. 1998; 52: 631636.
  • 25
    Fitzsimmons N,Presti J,Kane C, et al. Is biopsy Gleason score independently associated with biochemical progression following radical prostatectomy after adjusting for pathologic Gleason score?. J Urol. 2006; 176: 24532458.
  • 26
    Wallner KE,Merrick GM,True L, et al. 20 Gy versus 44 Gy supplemental beam radiation with Pd-103 prostate brachytherapy: preliminary biochemical outcomes from a prospective randomized multi-center trial. Radiother Oncol. 2005; 75: 307310.
  • 27
    Merrick GM,Butler WM,Wallner KE, et al. Androgen-deprivation therapy does not impact cause-specific or overall survival after permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65: 669677.
  • 28
    Beyer DC,McKeough T,Thomas T, et al. Impact of short course hormonal therapy on overall and cancer specific survival after permanent prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005; 61: 12991305.
  • 29
    Moyad MA. Step-by-step lifestyle changes that can improve urologic health in men. Part I. What do I tell my patients? Prim Care Clin Office Pract. 2006; 33: 139163.
  • 30
    Moyad MA. Step-by-step lifestyle changes that can improve urologic health in men. Part II. What do I tell my patients? Prim Care Clin Office Pract. 2006; 33: 165185.