447 476
[10]
Ploussard G, Isbarn H, Briganti A, et al. Members of the Prostate Cancer Working Group of the Young Academic Urologists Working Party of the European Association of Urology. Can we expand active surveillance criteria to include biopsy Gleason 3+4 prostate cancer?. A multi-institutional study of 2,323 patients. Urol Oncol 2015;33, 71.e1-9.[11]
Briganti A, Joniau S, Gontero P, et al. Identifying the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2012;61:584–92.[12]
Motamedinia P, Richard JL, McKiernan JM, Decastro GJ, Benson MC. Role of immediate confirmatory prostate biopsy to ensure accurate eligibility for active surveillance. Urology 2012;80:1070–4.[13]
Winters BR, Wright JL, Holt SK, et al. Extreme Gleason upgrading from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: a population-based analysis. Urology 2016;96:148–55.
[14]
Busch J, Magheli A, Leva N, et al. Higher rates of upgrading and upstaging in older patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and qualifying for active surveillance. BJU Int 2014;114:517–21.
[15]
Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 367:203–13.[16]
Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2014;370:932–42.[17]
Yamamoto T, Musunuru B, Vesprini D, et al. Metastatic prostate cancer in men initially managed with active surveillance. J Urol 2015;195:1409–14.[18]
Lane JA, Donovan JL, Davis M, et al. Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy, or radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: study design and diagnostic and baseline results of the ProtecT random- ised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:1109–18.[19]
Moyer VA. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2012; 157:120–34.[20]
Gondo T, Hricak H, Sala E, et al. Multiparametric 3T MRI for the prediction of pathological downgrading after radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy-proven Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2014;24:3161–70.[21]
Woo S, Kim SY, Lee J, Kim SH, Cho JY. PI-RADS version 2 for prediction of pathological downgrading after radical prostatec- tomy: a preliminary study in patients with biopsy-proven Gleason Score 7 (3+4) prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2016;26:3580–7.[22]
Cullen J, Rosner IL, Brand TC, et al. A biopsy-based 17-gene genomic prostate score predicts recurrence after radical prostatectomy and adverse surgical pathology in a racially diverse population of men with clinically low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2015;68:123–31.
E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 2 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 4 4 2 – 4 4 7
447