SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Cited in:

CrossRef

This article has been cited by:

  1. 1
    Michael R. Rosa, Laurent Milot, Linda Sugar, Danny Vesprini, Hans Chung, Andrew Loblaw, Gregory R. Pond, Laurence Klotz, Masoom A. Haider, A prospective comparison of MRI-US fused targeted biopsy versus systematic ultrasound-guided biopsy for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients on active surveillance, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2015, 41, 1
  2. 2
    Seyed Saeid Dianat, H. Ballentine Carter, Kenneth J. Pienta, Edward M. Schaeffer, Patricia K. Landis, Jonathan I. Epstein, Bruce J. Trock, Katarzyna J. Macura, Magnetic Resonance–invisible Versus Magnetic Resonance–visible Prostate Cancer in Active Surveillance: A Preliminary Report on Disease Outcomes, Urology, 2015, 85, 1, 147

    CrossRef

  3. 3
    S. Ongun, S. Celik, G. Gül-Niflioglu, G. Aslan, B. Tuna, U. Mungan, S. Uner, K. Yörükoğlu, ¿Son los criterios de vigilancia activa suficientes para predecir el cáncer de próstata de estadio avanzado?, Actas Urológicas Españolas, 2014, 38, 8, 499

    CrossRef

  4. 4
    J. C. Forde, P. J. Daly, S. White, M. Morrin, G. P. Smyth, B. D. P. O’Neill, R. E. Power, A single centre experience of active surveillance as management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer in Ireland, Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -), 2014, 183, 3, 377

    CrossRef

  5. 5
    Robert R. Flavell, Antonio C. Westphalen, Carmin Liang, Christopher C. Sotto, Susan M. Noworolski, Daniel B. Vigneron, Zhen J. Wang, John Kurhanewicz, Abnormal findings on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging predict subsequent biopsy upgrade in patients with low risk prostate cancer managed with active surveillance, Abdominal Imaging, 2014, 39, 5, 1027

    CrossRef

  6. 6
    S. Ongun, S. Celik, G. Gül-Niflioglu, G. Aslan, B. Tuna, U. Mungan, S. Uner, K. Yörükoğlu, Are active surveillance criteria sufficient for predicting advanced stage prostate cancer patients?, Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition), 2014, 38, 8, 499

    CrossRef

  7. 7
    A. Loiselle, C. Senechal, P. Nevoux, H. Benazzouz, B. Bhakkan-Mambir, J. Casenave, G. Gourtaud, M. Fofana, P. Blanchet, Intérêt de la densité du PSA comme facteur prédictif chez les patients afro-caribéens éligibles à la surveillance active du cancer de prostate selon les critères du protocole français, Progrès en Urologie, 2014, 24, 6, 327

    CrossRef

  8. 8
    R.C.N. van den Bergh, R.P. Meijer, S.W. Heijmink, H.G. van der Poel, MRI en active surveillance voor laagrisicoprostaatkanker, Tijdschrift voor Urologie, 2014, 4, 8, 185

    CrossRef

  9. 9
    Tatsuo Gondo, Hedvig Hricak, Evis Sala, Junting Zheng, Chaya S. Moskowitz, Melanie Bernstein, James A. Eastham, Hebert Alberto Vargas, Multiparametric 3T MRI for the prediction of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy-proven Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer, European Radiology, 2014, 24, 12, 3161

    CrossRef

  10. 10
    Jeffrey K. Mullins, H. Ballentine Carter, Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and active surveillance for prostate cancer: future directions, BJU International, 2014, 113, 6
  11. 11
    Roderick C.N. van den Bergh, Hashim U. Ahmed, Chris H. Bangma, Matthew R. Cooperberg, Arnauld Villers, Christopher C. Parker, Novel Tools to Improve Patient Selection and Monitoring on Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review, European Urology, 2014, 65, 6, 1023

    CrossRef

  12. 12
    Marc A. Bjurlin, James S. Wysock, Samir S. Taneja, Optimization of Prostate Biopsy, Urologic Clinics of North America, 2014, 41, 2, 299

    CrossRef

  13. 13
    Seyed Saeid Dianat, H. Ballentine Carter, Katarzyna J. Macura, Performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation and management of clinically low-risk prostate cancer, Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 2014, 32, 1, 39.e1

    CrossRef

  14. 14
    Hashim U. Ahmed, Prostate cancer: Melbourne Consensus—noble but misguided, Nature Reviews Urology, 2014, 11, 5, 250

    CrossRef

  15. 15
    Roderick C.N. van den Bergh, Henk G. van der Poel, Re: M. Minhaj Siddiqui, Soroush Rais-Bahrami, Hong Truong, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound–Fusion Biopsy Significantly Upgrades Prostate Cancer Versus Systematic 12-core Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy. Eur Urol 2013;64:713–9 and Re: Mark Emberton. Has Magnetic Resonance–Guided Biopsy of the Prostate Become the Standard of Care? Eur Urol 2013;64:720–1, European Urology, 2014, 65, 6, e106

    CrossRef

  16. 16
    F. Couñago, M. Recio, E. del Cerro, L. Cerezo, A. Díaz Gavela, F. J. Marcos, R. Murillo, J. M. Rodriguez Luna, I. J. Thuissard, J. L. R. Martin, Role of 3.0 T multiparametric MRI in local staging in prostate cancer and clinical implications for radiation oncology, Clinical and Translational Oncology, 2014, 16, 11, 993

    CrossRef

  17. 17
    G. Ploussard, P. Meria, P. Mongiat-Artus, F. Desgrandchamps, Seguimiento activo del cáncer de próstata, EMC - Urología, 2014, 46, 3, 1

    CrossRef

  18. 18
    Jim C. Hu, Edward Chang, Shyam Natarajan, Daniel J. Margolis, Malu Macairan, Patricia Lieu, Jiaoti Huang, Geoffrey Sonn, Frederick J. Dorey, Leonard S. Marks, Targeted Prostate Biopsy to Select Men for Active Surveillance: Do the Epstein Criteria Still Apply?, The Journal of Urology, 2014, 192, 2, 385

    CrossRef

  19. 19
    Christopher J. Welty, Peter R. Carroll, The Ongoing Need for Improved Risk Stratification and Monitoring for Those on Active Surveillance for Early Stage Prostate Cancer, European Urology, 2014, 65, 6, 1032

    CrossRef

  20. 20
    François Marliere, Philippe Puech, Ahmed Benkirane, Arnauld Villers, Laurent Lemaitre, Xavier Leroy, Nacim Betrouni, Adil Ouzzane, The role of MRI-targeted and confirmatory biopsies for cancer upstaging at selection in patients considered for active surveillance for clinically low-risk prostate cancer, World Journal of Urology, 2014, 32, 4, 951

    CrossRef