FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2146162013> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2146162013 endingPage "525" @default.
• W2146162013 startingPage "521" @default.
• W2146162013 abstract "No AccessJournal of UrologyCLINICAL UROLOGY: Original Articles1 Feb 2002PROSPECTIVE VALIDATION OF AN ALGORITHM WITH SYSTEMATIC SEXTANT BIOPSY TO PREDICT PELVIC LYMPH NODE METASTASIS IN PATIENTS WITH CLINICALLY LOCALIZED PROSTATIC CARCINOMA STEFAN CONRAD, MARKUS GRAEFEN, UWE PICHLMEIER, ROLF-PETER HENKE, ANDREAS ERBERSDOBLER, PETER G. HAMMERER, and HARTWIG HULAND STEFAN CONRADSTEFAN CONRAD More articles by this author , MARKUS GRAEFENMARKUS GRAEFEN More articles by this author , UWE PICHLMEIERUWE PICHLMEIER More articles by this author , ROLF-PETER HENKEROLF-PETER HENKE More articles by this author , ANDREAS ERBERSDOBLERANDREAS ERBERSDOBLER More articles by this author , PETER G. HAMMERERPETER G. HAMMERER Financial interest and/or other relationship with Astra Zeneca and Takeda. More articles by this author , and HARTWIG HULANDHARTWIG HULAND More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)69077-3AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: We prospectively validate an algorithm to predict pelvic lymph node metastasis in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. Material and Methods: A total of 293 patients with prostatic cancer were identified before pelvic lymph node dissection according to an algorithm developed with the classification and regression tree analysis as high—greater than 3 sextant biopsies containing any Gleason grade 4 or 5 cancer, intermediate—at least 1 biopsy dominated by Gleason grade 4 or 5 cancer but not high risk and low risk—all other patients. Observed and predicted frequencies of pelvic lymph node metastasis were compared. Results: The observed frequencies of lymph node metastasis were remarkably similar to the predicted frequencies, including 2.8% versus 2.2% in 85.7% of patients in the low risk group, 16.7% versus 19.4% in 10.2% intermediate and 41.7% versus 45.5% in 4.1% high, respectively. If patients in the low risk group were considered to have node negative disease the specificity and negative predictive value of the algorithm were 88.4% and 97.2%, respectively. Conclusions: Our algorithm is valid as a simple and accurate tool for the prediction of pelvic lymph node metastasis in patients with clinically localized prostatic cancer. Those 85.7% of patients classified by the algorithm to have a low risk of lymphatic spread should not undergo pelvic lymph node dissection before definitive local treatment. References 1 : Serum PSA after anatomic radical prostatectomy. The Johns Hopkins experience after 10 years. Urol Clin North Am1993; 20: 713. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 2 : Prognostic significance of lymph nodal metastases in prostate cancer. J Urol1989; 142: 332. Link, Google Scholar 3 : Limited efficacy of preoperative computed tomographic scanning for the evaluation of lymph node metastasis in patients before radical prostatectomy. Urology1996; 48: 428. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 4 : Endo-rectal coil magnetic resonance imaging in clinically localized prostate cancer: is it accurate?. J Urol1996; 156: 106. Link, Google Scholar 5 : Multicenter radioimmunoscintigraphic evaluation of patients with prostate carcinoma using indium-111 capromab pendetide. Cancer1998; 83: 739. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 6 : Staging pelvic lymphadenectomy for localized carcinoma of the prostate: a comparison of 3 surgical techniques. J Urol1997; 157: 1337. Link, Google Scholar 7 : Complications of laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection. J Urol1993; 149: 322. Link, Google Scholar 8 : Thromboembolic complication rate after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol1998; 33: 86. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 9 : Open pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: a reassessment. Urology1995; 46: 352. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 10 : Radical perineal prostatectomy without pelvic lymphadenectomy: selection criteria and early results. J Urol1996; 155: 612. Link, Google Scholar 11 : Has there been a recent shift in the pathological features and prognosis of patients treated with radical prostatectomy?. J Urol1997; 157: 2212. Link, Google Scholar 12 : You say either, I say either, but let’s not call the whole thing off: models for predicting the risk of lymph node involvement in patients with prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys1996; 34: 749. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 13 : Pelvic lymphadenectomy can be omitted in selected patients with carcinoma of the prostate: development of a system of patient selection. Urology1995; 45: 270. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 14 : Utility of preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen concentration and biopsy Gleason score in predicting risk of pelvic lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. Urology1994; 44: 519. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 15 : Eliminating the need for bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in select patients with prostate cancer. J Urol1994; 151: 1315. Link, Google Scholar 16 : The use of prostatic specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol1993; 150: 110. Link, Google Scholar 17 : Predicting the patient at low risk for lymph node metastasis with localized prostate cancer: an analysis of four statistical models. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys1996; 34: 543. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 18 : Use of systematic biopsy results to predict pathologic stage in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a preliminary report. Int J Urol1998; 5: 337. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 19 : Systematic sextant biopsies improve preoperative prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. J Urol1998; 159: 2023. Link, Google Scholar 20 : Histologic grading and clinical staging of prostate carcinoma. In: Urologic Pathology: The Prostate. Edited by . Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger1977: 171. Google Scholar 21 : Prognosis of patients with stage D1 prostate carcinoma following radical prostatectomy with and without early endocrine therapy. J Urol1990; 144: 700. Link, Google Scholar 22 : Frozen section detection of lymph node metastases in prostatic carcinoma: accuracy in grossly uninvolved pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. J Urol1986; 136: 1234. Link, Google Scholar 23 : Comparative financial analysis of laparoscopic versus open pelvic lymph node dissection for men with cancer of the prostate. J Urol1994; 151: 675. Link, Google Scholar 24 : Novel staging tool for localized prostate cancer: a pilot study using genetic adaptive neural networks. J Urol1998; 160: 430. Link, Google Scholar 25 : When is pelvic lymph node dissection necessary before radical prostatectomy? A decision analysis. J Urol2000; 164: 1235. Link, Google Scholar From the Department of Urology, Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science in Medicine and Institute of Pathology, University of Hamburg, Eppendorf University Hospital, Hamburg, Germany© 2002 by American Urological Association, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited by Syed K, Sleeman W, Soni P, Hagan M, Palta J, Kapoor R and Ghosh P (2021) Machine-Learning Models for Multicenter Prostate Cancer Treatment PlansJournal of Computational Biology, 10.1089/cmb.2020.0188, VOL. 28, NO. 2, (166-184), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2021. Neupane S, Nevalainen J, Raitanen J, Talala K, Kujala P, Taari K, Tammela T, Steyerberg E and Auvinen A (2021) Prognostic Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer Survival in a Randomized Screening Trial: Development and ValidationCancers, 10.3390/cancers13030435, VOL. 13, NO. 3, (435) Narayanan R and Wilson T (2018) Sentinel node evaluation in prostate cancerClinical & Experimental Metastasis, 10.1007/s10585-018-9936-4, VOL. 35, NO. 5-6, (471-485), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2018. Schlomm T, Huland H and Graefen M (2014) Improving Outcome of Surgical Procedures Is Not Possible Without Adequate Quality MeasurementEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.042, VOL. 65, NO. 6, (1017-1019), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2014. Sengupta S, Weerakoon M, Sethi K, Ischia J and Webb D (2012) Algorithm for selecting men for pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) during radical prostatectomy based on clinical risk factors in an Australian populationBJU International, 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11047.x, VOL. 109, (48-51), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2012. Minne L, Eslami S, de Keizer N, de Jonge E, de Rooij S and Abu-Hanna A (2012) Statistical process control for validating a classification tree model for predicting mortality – A novel approach towards temporal validationJournal of Biomedical Informatics, 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.08.015, VOL. 45, NO. 1, (37-44), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2012. Adkison J, McHaffie D, Bentzen S, Patel R, Khuntia D, Petereit D, Hong T, Tomé W and Ritter M (2012) Phase I Trial of Pelvic Nodal Dose Escalation With Hypofractionated IMRT for High-Risk Prostate CancerInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics, 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.09.018, VOL. 82, NO. 1, (184-190), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2012. Djavan B, Kazzazi A, Dulabon L, Momtahen S, Dianat S, Sand M, Cheetham P, Janetschek G, Lepor H and Graefen M (2011) Indications and Trends in Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Prostate CancerEuropean Urology Supplements, 10.1016/j.eursup.2011.03.014, VOL. 10, NO. 3, (e38-e43), Online publication date: 1-May-2011. Joung J, Cho I and Lee K (2011) Role of Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Prostate Cancer TreatmentKorean Journal of Urology, 10.4111/kju.2011.52.7.437, VOL. 52, NO. 7, (437), . D’Errico-Grigioni A, Fiorentino M, Vasuri F, Corti B, Ridolfi L and Grigioni W (2010) Expanding the Criteria of Organ Procurement from Donors with Prostate Cancer: The Application of the New Italian GuidelinesAmerican Journal of Transplantation, 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03198.x, VOL. 10, NO. 8, (1907-1911), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2010. Schlomm T, Chun F and Erbersdobler A (2010) From Gene to Clinic: TMA-Based Clinical Validation of Molecular Markers in Prostate Cancer Tissue Microarrays, 10.1007/978-1-60761-806-5_17, (177-189), . Shariat S, Kattan M, Vickers A, Karakiewicz P and Scardino P (2009) Critical review of prostate cancer predictive toolsFuture Oncology, 10.2217/fon.09.121, VOL. 5, NO. 10, (1555-1584), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2009. Ordon M and Nam R (2009) Lymph node assessment and lymphadenectomy in prostate cancerJournal of Surgical Oncology, 10.1002/jso.21225, VOL. 99, NO. 4, (215-224), Online publication date: 15-Mar-2009. Bjerggaard Jensen J, Johansen J and Graversen P (2009) Laparoscopic pelvic lymph-node dissection in prostate cancer before external beam radiotherapy: Risk factors of nodal involvement and relapse following intended curative treatmentScandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology, 10.1080/00365590802273234, VOL. 43, NO. 1, (19-24), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2009. Chun F and Karakiewicz P (2009) Decision Aid Criteria and Artificial Neural Networks for Optimizing Prostate Cancer Risk Prediction Prostate Cancer Screening, 10.1007/978-1-60327-281-0_11, (181-193), . Shariat S and Kattan M (2009) Nomograms for Prostate Cancer Prostate Cancer Screening, 10.1007/978-1-60327-281-0_10, (117-180), . Breyer B, Greene K, Dall'Era M, Davies B and Kane C (2008) Pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancerProstate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, 10.1038/pcan.2008.29, VOL. 11, NO. 4, (320-324), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2008. Shariat S, Karakiewicz P, Roehrborn C and Kattan M (2008) An updated catalog of prostate cancer predictive toolsCancer, 10.1002/cncr.23908, VOL. 113, NO. 11, (3075-3099), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2008. Chun F (2008) Editorial Comment on: 11C-Choline-Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography for Preoperative Lymph-Node Staging in Intermediate-Risk and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Clinical Staging NomogramsEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.04.031, VOL. 54, NO. 2, (400-401), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2008. Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P, Picchio M, Corti B, Briganti A, Franceschelli A, Sanguedolce F, Bertaccini A, Farsad M, Giovacchini G, Fanti S, Grigioni W, Fazio F, Montorsi F, Rigatti P and Martorana G (2008) 11C-Choline Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography for Preoperative Lymph-Node Staging in Intermediate-Risk and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Clinical Staging NomogramsEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.04.030, VOL. 54, NO. 2, (392-401), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2008. Müller-Lisse U and Müller-Lisse U (2008) Prostatakarzinom Radiologische Diagnostik in der Onkologie, 10.1007/978-3-540-29319-4_10, (219-253), . Zhou M and Magi-Galluzzi C (2008) Pathologic Implications of Prostate Biopsy Prostate Biopsy, 10.1007/978-1-60327-078-6_17, (231-254), . Winter A, Vogt H, Weckermann D, Harzmann R and Wawroschek F (2008) Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Prostatic Cancer Radioguided Surgery, 10.1007/978-0-387-38327-9_15, (151-165), . Chun F, Briganti A, Gallina A, Hutterer G, Shariat S, Antebie E, Walz J, Roehrborn C, Salonia A, Rigatti P, Saad F, Huland H, Montorsi F, Graefen M and Karakiewicz P (2007) Prostate-Specific Antigen Improves the Ability of Clinical Stage and Biopsy Gleason Sum to Predict the Pathologic Stage at Radical Prostatectomy in the New MillenniumEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.03.018, VOL. 52, NO. 4, (1067-1075), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2007. Briganti A, Shariat S, Chun F, Hutterer G, Roehrborn C, Gallina A, Rigatti P, Valiquette L, Montorsi F and Karakiewicz P (2007) Differences in the rate of lymph node invasion in men with clinically localized prostate cancer might be related to the continent of originBJU International, 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07005.x, VOL. 100, NO. 3, (528-532), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2007. Schenck M, Boergermann C, vom Dorp F, Busch Y, Groneberg M, Wilker B, Keitsch S, Moyrer S, Schmid K, Stuschke M, Ruebben H and Gulbins E (2007) Identifikation der molekularen Grundlagen der Metastasierung zur Entwicklung neuer Therapiestrategien des metastasierten ProstatakarzinomsDer Urologe, 10.1007/s00120-007-1387-5, VOL. 46, NO. 9, (1261-1262), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2007. Heidenreich A, Ohlmann C and Polyakov S (2007) Anatomical Extent of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Patients Undergoing Radical ProstatectomyEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.04.020, VOL. 52, NO. 1, (29-37), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2007. Chun F, Karakiewicz P, Briganti A, Walz J, Kattan M, Huland H and Graefen M (2007) A critical appraisal of logistic regression-based nomograms, artificial neural networks, classification and regression-tree models, look-up tables and risk-group stratification models for prostate cancerBJU International, 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06694.x, VOL. 99, NO. 4, (794-800), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2007. Chun F, Karakiewicz P, Huland H and Graefen M (2007) Role of nomograms for prostate cancer in 2007World Journal of Urology, 10.1007/s00345-007-0146-y, VOL. 25, NO. 2, (131-142), Online publication date: 29-Mar-2007. Sivalingam S, Oxley J, Probert J, Stolzenburg J and Schwaibold H (2007) Role of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Prostate Cancer ManagementUrology, 10.1016/j.urology.2006.10.031, VOL. 69, NO. 2, (203-209), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2007. Chun F, Karakiewicz P, Briganti A, Gallina A, Kattan M, Montorsi F, Huland H and Graefen M (2006) Prostate Cancer Nomograms: An UpdateEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.042, VOL. 50, NO. 5, (914-926), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2006. Pinthus J, Witkos M, Fleshner N, Sweet J, Evans A, Jewett M, Krahn M, Alibhai S and Trachtenberg J (2018) Prostate Cancers Scored as Gleason 6 on Prostate Biopsy are Frequently Gleason 7 Tumors at Radical Prostatectomy: Implication on OutcomeJournal of Urology, VOL. 176, NO. 3, (979-984), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2006. Schumacher M, Burkhard F, Thalmann G, Fleischmann A and Studer U (2006) Is Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Necessary in Patients with a Serum PSA<10ng/ml Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer?European Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.01.061, VOL. 50, NO. 2, (272-279), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2006. Chun F, Graefen M, Zacharias M, Haese A, Steuber T, Schlomm T, Walz J, Karakiewicz P and Huland H (2006) Anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy—long-term recurrence-free survival rates for localized prostate cancerWorld Journal of Urology, 10.1007/s00345-006-0058-2, VOL. 24, NO. 3, (273-280), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2006. Briganti A, Chun F, Salonia A, Zanni G, Scattoni V, Valiquette L, Rigatti P, Montorsi F and Karakiewicz P (2006) Validation of a Nomogram Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Invasion among Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy and an Extended Pelvic LymphadenectomyEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.01.043, VOL. 49, NO. 6, (1019-1027), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2006. Steuber T, Erbersdobler A, Graefen M, Haese A, Huland H and Karakiewicz P (2006) Comparative assessment of the 1992 and 2002 pathologic T3 substages for the prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomyCancer, 10.1002/cncr.21632, VOL. 106, NO. 4, (775-782), Online publication date: 15-Feb-2006. Chun F, Briganti A, Lebeau T, Fradet V, Steuber T, Walz J, Schlomm T, Eichelberg C, Haese A, Erbersdobler A, McCormack M, Perrotte P, Graefen M, Huland H and Karakiewicz P (2006) The 2002 AJCC pT2 Substages Confer No Prognostic Information on the Rate of Biochemical Recurrence After Radical ProstatectomyEuropean Urology, 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.009, VOL. 49, NO. 2, (273-279), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2006. Heidenreich A and Ohlmann C (2005) The Role of Anatomic Extented Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate CancerEAU Update Series, 10.1016/j.euus.2005.03.006, VOL. 3, NO. 2, (98-106), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2005. STEUBER T, KARAKIEWICZ P, AUGUSTIN H, ERBERSDOBLER A, LANGE I, HAESE A, CHUN K, WALZ J, GRAEFEN M and HULAND H (2018) TRANSITION ZONE CANCERS UNDERMINE THE PREDICTIVE ACCURACY OF PARTIN TABLE STAGE PREDICTIONSJournal of Urology, VOL. 173, NO. 3, (737-741), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2005. Heidenreich A, Ohlmann C and Polyakov S (2005) Anatomical Extent of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Bladder and Prostate CancerEuropean Urology Supplements, 10.1016/j.eursup.2005.01.006, VOL. 4, NO. 4, (15-24), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2005. Eastham J (2004) Editorial commentUrologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 10.1016/j.urolonc.2004.05.004, VOL. 22, NO. 3, (202-204), Online publication date: 1-May-2004. AUGUSTIN H, EGGERT T, WENSKE S, KARAKIEWICZ P, PALISAAR J, DAGHOFER F, HULAND H and GRAEFEN M (2018) Comparison of Accuracy Between the Partin Tables Of 1997 and 2001 to Predict Final Pathological Stage in Clinically Localized Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 171, NO. 1, (177-181), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004.NAYA Y and BABAIAN R (2018) The Predictors of Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis at Radical Retropubic ProstatectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 170, NO. 6, (2306-2310), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2003.CAGIANNOS I, KARAKIEWICZ P, EASTHAM J, OHORI M, RABBANI F, GERIGK C, REUTER V, GRAEFEN M, HAMMERER P, ERBERSDOBLER A, HULAND H, KUPELIAN P, KLEIN E, QUINN D, HENSHALL S, GRYGIEL J, SUTHERLAND R, STRICKER P, MORASH C, SCARDINO P and KATTAN M (2018) A Preoperative Nomogram Identifying Decreased Risk of Positive Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Patients With Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 170, NO. 5, (1798-1803), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2003. Augustin H, Graefen M, Palisaar J, Blonski J, Erbersdobler A, Daghofer F, Huland H and Hammerer P (2003) Prognostic Significance of Visible Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound in Impalpable Prostate Cancers: Implications for StagingJournal of Clinical Oncology, 10.1200/JCO.2003.11.130, VOL. 21, NO. 15, (2860-2868), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2003. NOGUCHI M, STAMEY T, McNEAL J and NOLLEY R (2018) Prognostic Factors for Multifocal Prostate Cancer in Radical Prostatectomy Specimens: Lack of Significance of Secondary CancersJournal of Urology, VOL. 170, NO. 2, (459-463), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2003. Che M, Sakr W and Grignon D (2003) Pathologic features the urologist should expect on a prostate biopsyUrologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 10.1016/S1078-1439(03)00008-5, VOL. 21, NO. 2, (153-161), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2003. Augustin H, Hammerer P, Graefen M, Palisaar J, Noldus J, Fernandez S and Huland H (2003) Intraoperative and Perioperative Morbidity of Contemporary Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy in a Consecutive Series of 1243 Patients: Results of a Single Center between 1999 and 2002European Urology, 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00495-5, VOL. 43, NO. 2, (113-118), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2003. Huland H, Graefen M, Haese A, Hammerer P, Palisaar J, Pichlmeier U, Henke R, Erbersdobler A, Huland E and Lilja H (2003) Clinical and Pathohistological Prognosticators Prostate Cancer, 10.1007/978-3-642-56321-8_7, (67-75), . Haese A, Epstein J, Huland H and Partin A (2002) Validation of a biopsy-based pathologic algorithm for predicting lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate carcinomaCancer, 10.1002/cncr.10811, VOL. 95, NO. 5, (1016-1021), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2002. Donahue T and Moul J (2002) Diagnostic accuracy of prostate needle biopsyCurrent Urology Reports, 10.1007/s11934-002-0067-7, VOL. 3, NO. 3, (215-221), Online publication date: 1-May-2002. Wirth M and Froehner M (2002) The Management of Localized or Locally Advanced Prostate CancerAmerican Journal of Cancer, 10.2165/00024669-200201060-00002, VOL. 1, NO. 6, (387-396), . Che M and Grignon D Pathology of prostate cancer Prostate Cancer: New Horizons in Research and Treatment, 10.1007/0-306-48143-X_1, (3-17) Volume 167Issue 2 Part 1February 2002Page: 521-525 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2002 by American Urological Association, Inc.Keywordsneoplasm metastasisprostatic neoplasmsbiopsylymph node excisionMetricsAuthor Information STEFAN CONRAD More articles by this author MARKUS GRAEFEN More articles by this author UWE PICHLMEIER More articles by this author ROLF-PETER HENKE More articles by this author ANDREAS ERBERSDOBLER More articles by this author PETER G. HAMMERER Financial interest and/or other relationship with Astra Zeneca and Takeda. More articles by this author HARTWIG HULAND More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ..." @default.
• W2146162013 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5014573705 @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5032969951 @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5051959181 @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5052636859 @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5069651177 @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5085865016 @default.
• W2146162013 creator A5089661293 @default.
• W2146162013 date "2002-02-01" @default.
• W2146162013 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W2146162013 title "PROSPECTIVE VALIDATION OF AN ALGORITHM WITH SYSTEMATIC SEXTANT BIOPSY TO PREDICT PELVIC LYMPH NODE METASTASIS IN PATIENTS WITH CLINICALLY LOCALIZED PROSTATIC CARCINOMA" @default.
• W2146162013 cites W1259141303 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W155375076 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W182657709 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W190857994 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W1971048935 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W1973502536 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W1973951614 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W1980207312 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W1994876742 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2016683511 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2020345085 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2027588785 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2041101500 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2041377816 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2048553625 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2049456541 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2088740850 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2092056700 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2106342858 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2158844015 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2409072579 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2409573382 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W2433536271 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W46295630 @default.
• W2146162013 cites W571448349 @default.
• W2146162013 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(01)69077-3" @default.
• W2146162013 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11792910" @default.
• W2146162013 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2146162013 type Work @default.
• W2146162013 sameAs 2146162013 @default.
• W2146162013 citedByCount "71" @default.
• W2146162013 countsByYear W21461620132012 @default.
• W2146162013 countsByYear W21461620132014 @default.
• W2146162013 countsByYear W21461620132018 @default.
• W2146162013 countsByYear W21461620132020 @default.
• W2146162013 countsByYear W21461620132021 @default.
• W2146162013 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5014573705 @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5032969951 @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5051959181 @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5052636859 @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5069651177 @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5085865016 @default.
• W2146162013 hasAuthorship W2146162013A5089661293 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2775934546 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2776235491 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2777546739 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2779013556 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2780849966 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2992571226 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C2993388676 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C121608353 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C126322002 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C126838900 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C126894567 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C142724271 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2775934546 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2776235491 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2777546739 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2779013556 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2780849966 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2992571226 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C2993388676 @default.
• W2146162013 hasConceptScore W2146162013C71924100 @default.
• W2146162013 hasIssue "2 Part 1" @default.
• W2146162013 hasLocation W21461620131 @default.
• W2146162013 hasLocation W21461620132 @default.
• W2146162013 hasOpenAccess W2146162013 @default.
• W2146162013 hasPrimaryLocation W21461620131 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W1974363842 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2036626007 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2142021573 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2153970681 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2348209520 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2407351355 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2410431302 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W2747673629 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W3031737811 @default.
• W2146162013 hasRelatedWork W3032483503 @default.
• W2146162013 hasVolume "167" @default.

• next