249 320
[78]
Cuzick J, Swanson GP, Fisher G, et al. Prognostic value of an RNA expression signature derived from cell cycle proliferation genes in patients with prostate cancer: A retrospective study. Lancet Oncol 2011;12:245–55.
[79]
Bishoff JT, Freedland SJ, Gerber L, et al. Prognostic utility of the cell cycle progression score generated from biopsy in men treated with prostatectomy. J Urol 2014;192:409–14.
[80]
Freedland SJ, Gerber L, Reid J, et al. Prognostic utility of cell cycle progression score in men with prostate cancer after primary external beam radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013;86:848–53.
[81]
Cooperberg MR, Simko JP, Cowan JE, et al. Validation of a cell-cycle progression gene panel to improve risk stratification in a contem- porary prostatectomy cohort. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:1428–34.
[82]
Riches SF, Payne GS, Morgan VA, et al. Multivariate modelling of prostate cancer combining magnetic resonance derived T2, diffu- sion, dynamic contrast-enhanced and spectroscopic parameters. Eur Radiol 2015;25:1247–56.
[83]
Lee DH, Koo KC, Lee SH, et al. Tumor lesion diameter on diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging could help predict insig- nificant prostate cancer in patients eligible for active surveillance: preliminary analysis. J Urol 2013;190:1213–7.
[84]
Guzzo TJ, Resnick MJ, Canter DJ, et al. Endorectal T2-weighted MRI does not differentiate between favorable and adverse pathologic features in men with prostate cancer who would qualify for active surveillance. Urol Oncol 2012;30:301–5.
[85]
Turkbey B, Mani H, Aras O, et al. Prostate cancer: can multipara- metric MR imaging help identify patients who are candidates for active surveillance? Radiology 2013;268:144–52.
[86]
Ploussard G, Xylinas E, Durand X, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging does not improve the prediction of misclassification of prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance when the most stringent selection criteria are based on the saturation biopsy scheme. BJU Int 2011;108:513–7.
[87]
Borofsky MS, Rosenkrantz AB, Abraham N, Jain R, Taneja SS. Does suspicion of prostate cancer on integrated T2 and diffusion- weighted MRI predict more adverse pathology on radical prosta- tectomy? Urology 2013;81:1279–83.
[88]
Park BH, Jeon HG, Choo SH, et al. Role of multiparametric 3.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging in patients with prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance. BJU Int 2014;113:864–70.
[89]
Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, et al. Magnetic resonance imag- ing in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2015;67:627–36.
[90]
Moore CM, Giganti F, Albertsen P, et al. Reporting magnetic reso- nance imaging in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: the PRECISE Recommendations—a report of a European School of Oncology Task Force. Eur Urol 2017;71:648–55.
[91]
Tran GN, Leapman MS, Nguyen HG, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy during prostate cancer active surveillance. Eur Urol 2017;72:275–81.
[92]
Gayet M, van der Aa A, Beerlage HP, Schrier BP, Mulders PFA, Wijkstra H. The value of magnetic resonance imaging and ultra- sonography (MRI/US)-fusion biopsy platforms in prostate cancer detection: a systematic review. BJU Int 2016;117:392–400.
[93]
Recabal P, Ehdaie B. The role of MRI in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2015;25: 504–9.
[94]
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.
[95]
Mozer P, Roupreˆt M, Le Cossec C, et al. First round of targeted biopsies using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fu- sion compared with conventional transrectal ultrasonography- guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer. BJU Int 2015;115:50–7.
[96]
Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, Pickles T, Kakehi Y, Rannikko A, et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 2013;63:597–603.
[97]
Bul M, van den Bergh RCN, Zhu X, Rannikko A, Vasarainen H, Bangma CH, et al. Outcomes of initially expectantly managed patients with low or intermediate risk screen-detected localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012;110:1672–7.
[98]
Selvadurai ED, Singhera M, Thomas K, Mohammed K, Woode- Amissah R, Horwich A, et al. Medium-term outcomes of active surveillance for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2013;64:981–7.
[99] Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, Jethava V, Zhang L, Jain S, et al.
Long-Term Follow-Up of a Large Active Surveillance Cohort of
Patients With Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014
. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.1192.
[100]
Truesdale MD, Cheetham PJ, Hruby GW, Wenske S, Conforto AK, Cooper AB, et al. An evaluation of patient selection criteria on predicting progression-free survival after primary focal unilateral nerve-sparing cryoablation for prostate cancer: recommendations for follow up. Cancer J 2010;16:544–9.
E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 2 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 2 3 8 – 2 4 9
249