1.Hull GW., Rabbani F., Abbas F., Wheeler TM., Kattan MW., Scardino PT. Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1, 000 consecutive patients. J Urol. 2002. 167:528–34.
2.Kattan MW., Eastham JA., Stapleton AM., Wheeler TM., Scardino PT. A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998. 90:766–71.
Article
3.Partin AW., Kattan MW., Subong EN., Walsh PC., Wojno KJ., Oesterling JE, et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA. 1997. 277:1445–51.
Article
4.Carlson GD., Calvanese CB., Kahane H., Epstein JI. Accuracy of biopsy Gleason scores from a large uropathology laboratory: use of a diagnostic protocol to minimize observer variability. Urology. 1998. 51:525–9.
Article
5.Danziger M., Shevchuk M., Antonescu C., Matthews GJ., Fracchia JA. Predictive accuracy of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: correlations to matched prostatectomy specimens. Urology. 1997. 49:863–7.
Article
6.Gregori A., Vieweg J., Dahm P., Paulson DF. Comparison of ultrasound-guided biopsies and prostatectomy specimens: predictive accuracy of Gleason score and tumor site. Urol Int. 2001. 66:66–71.
Article
7.King CR. Patterns of prostate cancer biopsy grading: trends and clinical implications. Int J Cancer. 2000. 90:305–11.
8.Lattouf JB., Saad F. Gleason score on biopsy: Is it reliable for predicting the final grade on pathology? BJU Int. 2002. 90:694–8.
Article
9.Narain V., Bianco FJ Jr., Grignon DJ., Sakr WA., Pontes JE., Wood DP Jr. How accurately does prostate biopsy Gleason score predict pathologic findings and disease free survival? Prostate. 2001. 49:185–90.
Article
10.Thickman D., Speers WC., Philpott PJ., Shapiro H. Effect of the number of core biopsies of the prostate on predicting Gleason score of prostate cancer. J Urol. 1996. 156:110–3.
Article
11.San Francisco IF., DeWolf WC., Rosen S., Upton M., Olumi AF. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003. 169:136–40.
Article
12.Emiliozzi P., Maymone S., Patemo A., Scarpone P., Amini M., Proietti G, et al. Increased accuracy of biopsy Gleason score obtained by extended needle biopsy. J Urol. 2004. 172:2224–6.
Article
13.Eskew LA., Bare RL., McCullough DL. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol. 1997. 157:199–202.
Article
14.Eskew LA., Woodru伴RD ., Bare RL., McCullough DL. Prostate cancer diagnosed by the 5 region biopsy method is significant disease. J Urol. 1998. 160:794–6.
Article
15.Gore JL., Shariat SF., Miles BJ., Kadmon D., Jiang N., Wheeler TM, et al. Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer J Urol. 2001. 165:1554–9.
16.Hodge KK., McNeal JE., Terris MK., Stamey TA. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol. 1989. 142:71–4.
Article
17.Chang JJ., Shinohara K., Bhargava V., Presti JC Jr. Prospective evaluation of lateral biopsies of the peripheral zone for prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 1998. 160:2111–4.
Article
18.Stamey TA. Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology. 1995. 45:2–12.
Article
19.Terris MK., Wallen EM., Stamey TA. Comparison of mid-lobe versus lateral systematic sextant biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. Urol Int. 1997. 59:239–42.
Article
20.Epstein JI., Walsh PC., Carter HB. Importance of posterolateral needle biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. Urology. 2001. 57:1112–6.
Article
21.Presti JC Jr., O' Dowd GJ., Miller MC., Mattu R., Veltri RW. Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study. J Urol. 2003. 169:125–9.
Article
22.Cho SH., Kim SI., Park HY. The efficacy of routine sextant prostate biopsy plus selective lesion-directed prostate biopsy. Korean J Urol. 2005. 46:700–3.
23.Yeo BG., Lee ES., Byun SS. Peripheral 10 sites prostate biopsy: Is it really effective? Korean J Urol. 2003. 44:851–4.
24.Chan TY., Chan DY., Stutzman KL., Epstein JI. Does increased needle biopsy sampling of the prostate detect a higher number of potentially insignificant tumors? J Urol. 2001. 166:2181–4.
Article
25.Naughton CK., Omstein DK., Smith DS., Catalona WJ. Pain and morbidity of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial of 6 versus 12 cores. J Urol. 2000. 163:168–71.
Article
26.Presti JC Jr., Chang JJ., Bhargava V., Shinohara K. The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol. 2000. 163:163–6.
Article
27.Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol. 1992. 23:273–9.
Article
28.Lee AK., Doytchinova T., Chen MH., Renshaw AA., Weinstein M., Richie JP, et al. Can the core length involved with prostate cancer identify clinically insignificant disease in low risk patients diagnosed on the basis of a single positive core? Urol Oncol. 2003. 21:123–7.
Article
29.D' Amico AV., Wu Y., Chen MH., Nash M., Renshaw AA., Richie JP. Pathologic findings and prostate specific antigen outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients diagnosed on the basis of a single microscopic focus of prostate carcinoma with a gleason score 17. Cancer. 2000. 89:1810–7.
30.Miyake Η., Ono Y., Park SJ., Hara I., Eto H. Pathological findings of radical prostatectomy specimens in Japanese men diagnosed on single core positive prostate biopsy in eight with a Gleason score less than 4. Int J Urol. 2003. 10:383–6.
Article