655 692
affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the
manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultan-
cies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties,
or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: None.
Funding/Support and role of the sponsor:
European School of Oncology
(ESO), supported by educational grants from Siemens Healthcare GmbH
and the ProADAMO Foundation, funded the research. The organisations
cited had no role in the data collection or analysis, or in manuscript
preparation. The paper was developed by the ESO-PRECISE Task Force,
and the initiative was supported by the ESO and through unrestricted
educational grants provided by Siemens Healthcare and the ProADAMO
Foundation.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. eururo.2016.06.011.
References
[1]
Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011;59:477–94.
[2]
Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012;22:746–57.[3]
Kirkham AP, Haslam P, Keanie JY, et al. Prostate MRI: Who, when, and how? Report from a UK consensus meeting. Clin Radiol 2013;68:1016–23.[4]
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 2016;69: 16–40.[5] Prostate cancer: diagnosis and management. National Institute for
Health and Care Excellence Web site.
https://www.nice.org.uk/ guidance/cg175. Updated January 2014.
[6]
Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2014;67:627–36.
[7] Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropri-
ateness Method user’s manual 2001. RAND Web site.
http://www. rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1269.html.
[8]
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.
[9]
Walton Diaz A, Shakir NA, George AK, et al. Use of serial multi- parametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Urol Oncol 2015;33:202.e1–7.
[10]
Loeb S, Walter D, Curnyn C, Gold HT, Lepor H, Makarov DV. How active is active surveillance? Intensity of follow-up during active surveillance for prostate cancer in the United States. J Urol 2016; 196:721–6.[11]
Mullins JK, Bonekamp D, Landis P, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings in men with low-risk prostate cancer followed using active surveillance. BJU Int 2013;111:1037–45.[12]
Lee DH, Koo KC, Lee SH, et al. Low-risk prostate cancer patients without visible tumor (t1c) on multiparametric MRI could qualify for active surveillance candidate even if they did not meet inclusion criteria of active surveillance protocol. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2013; 43:553–8.[13]
Rais-Bahrami S, Tu¨ rkbey B, Rastinehad AR, et al. Natural history of small index lesions suspicious for prostate cancer on multipara- metric MRI: recommendations for interval imaging follow-up. Diagn Interv Radiol 2014;20:293–8.[14]
Bruinsma SM. Global Action Plan on Active Surveillance for low risk PCa: Movember Foundation launches integrated project on active surveillance. Eur Urol Today 2014;26:26.
E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 1 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 6 4 8 – 6 5 5
655