627 692
[12]
Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2016;40:244– 52.[13]
Hayes JH, Barry MJ, et al. Screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test: a review of current evidence. JAMA 2014;311:1143–9.[14]
Schro¨der FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 2014;384:2027–35.[15]
Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet 2012;380:1778–86.[16]
Banerji JS, Wolff EM, M assman III JD, Odem-Davis K, Porter CR, Corman JM. Prostate needle biopsy outcomes in the era of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against prostate specific antigen based screening. J Urol 2016;195:66–73.[17]
Arnsrud Godtman R, Holmberg E, Lilja H, Stranne J, Hugosson J. Opportunistic testing versus organized prostate-specific antigen screening: outcome after 18 years in the Goteborg randomized population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur Urol 2015;68:354–60.
[18]
Vickers AJ, Ulmert D, Sjoberg DD, et al. Strategy for detection of prostate cancer based on relation between prostate specific antigen at age 40-55 and long term risk of metastasis: case-control study. BMJ 2013;346:f2023.
[19]
Carlsson S, Assel M, Sjoberg D, et al. Influence of blood prostate specific antigen levels at age 60 on benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening: population based cohort study. BMJ 2014;348:g2296.
[20]
Louie KS, Seigneurin A, Cathcart P, Sasieni P. Do prostate cancer risk models improve the predictive accuracy of PSA screening?. A meta- analysis. Ann Oncol 2015;26:848–64.[21]
Droz JP, Aapro M, Balducci L, et al. Management of prostate cancer in older patients: updated recommendations of a working group of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:e404–14.[22]
Eggener SE, Large MC, Gerber GS, et al. Empiric antibiotics for an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level: a randomised, pro- spective, controlled multi-institutional trial. BJU Int 2013;112: 925–9.[23]
Loeb S, Catalona WJ. The Prostate Health Index: a new test for the detection of prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol 2014;6:74–7.
[24]
Bryant RJ, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, et al. Predicting high-grade cancer at ten-core prostate biopsy using four kallikrein markers measured in blood in the ProtecT study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107:djv095.
[25]
Hara R, Jo Y, Fujii T, et al. Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: prospective randomized study compar- ing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy. Urology 2008;71:191–5.[26]
Takenaka A, Hara R, Ishimura T, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transperineal and trans- rectal 12-core prostate biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2008;11:134–8.[27]
Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al. Systematic review of com- plications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2013;64:876–92.
[28]
Futterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic reso- nance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015;68:1045–53.[29]
Le JD, Stephenson S, Brugger M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging- ultrasound fusion biopsy for prediction of final prostate pathology. J Urol 2014;192:1367–73.[30]
Moore CM, Robertson NL, Arsanious N, et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a sys- tematic review. Eur Urol 2013;63:125–40.[31]
Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. Comparison of MR/ ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 2015;313:390–7.
[32]
Schoots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW, Hunink MG. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer de- tection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2015;68:438–50.
[33]
Panebianco V, Barchetti F, Sciarra A, et al. Multiparametric mag- netic resonance imaging vs. standard care in men being evaluated for prostate cancer: a randomized study. Urol Oncol 2015;33, 17.e1–e7.[34]
Baco E, Rud E, Eri LM, et al. A randomized controlled trial to assess and compare the outcomes of two-core prostate biopsy guided by fused magnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound images and traditional 12-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol 2016;69:149–56.
[35]
Vache T, Bratan F, Me`ge-Lechvallier F, Roche S, Rabilloud M, Rou- vie`re O. Characterization of prostate lesions as benign or malignant at multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of three scoring sys- tems in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Radiology 2014;272:446–55.[36]
Barentsz JO, Weinreb JC, Verma S, et al. Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 guidelines for multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imag- ing and recommendations for use. Eur Urol 2016;69:41–9.[37]
Albertsen PC. Observational studies and the natural history of screen-detected prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2015;25:232–7.
[38]
Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;367: 203–13.[39]
Albertsen PC, Moore DF, Shih W, Lin Y, Lu-Yao GL. Impact of comorbidity on survival among men with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1335–41.[40]
Thomsen FB, Brasso K, Klotz LH, et al. Active surveillance for clinically localized prostate cancer–a systematic review. J Surg Oncol 2014;109:830–5.[41]
Loeb S, Bruinsma SM, Nicholson J, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinicopathologic variables and biomarkers for risk stratification. Eur Urol 2015;67:619–26.[42]
Montironi R, Hammond EH, Lin DW, et al. Consensus statement with recommendations on active surveillance inclusion criteria and definition of progression in men with localized prostate cancer: the critical role of the pathologist. Virchows Arch 2014;465:623–8.[43]
Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2015;67:627–36.
[44]
Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, Nam R, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:126–31.
[45]
Steuber T, Graefen M, Haese A, et al. Validation of a nomogram for prediction of side specific extracapsular extension at radical pros- tatectomy. J Urol 2006;175:939–44, discussion 944.
[46]
de Rooij M, Hamoen EH, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for local staging of pros- tate cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2016;70:233–45.
[47]
Vickers AJ, Savage CJ, Hruza M, et al. The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:475–80.[48]
Ramsay C, Pickard R, Robertson C, et al. Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effec- tiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal ofE U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 1 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 6 1 8 – 6 2 9
627