Similar articles

• Point: Should Active Surveillance Be Used for Gleason 3+4 Prostate Cancer?

  Bhat A, Punnen S. Bhat A, et al. Oncology (Williston Park). 2019 Jun 19;33(6):235-6. Oncology (Williston Park). 2019. PMID: 31219609 No abstract available.
• Ongoing Gleason grade migration in localized prostate cancer and implications for use of active surveillance.

  Weiner AB, Etzioni R, Eggener SE. Weiner AB, et al. Eur Urol. 2014 Oct;66(4):611-2. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.02.051. Epub 2014 Mar 4. Eur Urol. 2014. PMID: 24630416 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• Stability of a 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score in Serial Testing of Men on Active Surveillance for Early Stage Prostate Cancer.

  Cedars BE, Washington SL 3rd, Cowan JE, Leapman M, Tenggara I, Chan JM, Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Cedars BE, et al. J Urol. 2019 Oct;202(4):696-701. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000271. Epub 2019 Sep 6. J Urol. 2019. PMID: 30958742
• Morphologic Updates in Prostate Pathology.

  Adeniran AJ, Humphrey PA. Adeniran AJ, et al. Surg Pathol Clin. 2015 Dec;8(4):539-60. doi: 10.1016/j.path.2015.08.002. Surg Pathol Clin. 2015. PMID: 26612214 Review.
• Clinical and molecular rationale to retain the cancer descriptor for Gleason score 6 disease.

  Reichard CA, Klein EA. Reichard CA, et al. Nat Rev Urol. 2017 Jan;14(1):59-64. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2016.240. Epub 2016 Nov 29. Nat Rev Urol. 2017. PMID: 27898099 Review.