9. REFERENCES
1.Phillips, B. Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. Updated by Jeremy Howick March 2009. 1998.
https://www.cebm.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/CEBM-Levels-of-Evidence.pdf
2.Guyatt, G.H., et al. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ, 2008. 336: 1049.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18467413
3.Culp, M.B., et al. Recent Global Patterns in Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 38.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31493960
4.Bray, F., et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin, 2024. 74: 229.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38572751
5.Bergengren, O., et al. 2022 Update on Prostate Cancer Epidemiology and Risk Factors-A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 191.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37202314
6.Union, E. Prostate cancer burden in EU-27. 2021.
https://ecis.jrc.ec.europa.eu
7.Bell, K.J., et al. Prevalence of incidental prostate cancer: A systematic review of autopsy studies. Int J Cancer, 2015. 137: 1749.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25821151
8.Haas, G.P., et al. The worldwide epidemiology of prostate cancer: perspectives from autopsy studies. Can J Urol, 2008. 15: 3866.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18304396
9.Fleshner, K., et al. The effect of the USPSTF PSA screening recommendation on prostate cancer incidence patterns in the USA. Nat Rev Urol, 2017. 14: 26.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27995937
10.Kimura, T., et al. Global Trends of Latent Prostate Cancer in Autopsy Studies. Cancers (Basel), 2021. 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33478075
11.James, N.D., et al. The Lancet Commission on prostate cancer: planning for the surge in cases. Lancet, 2024. 403: 1683.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38583453
12.Organization., I.A.f.R.o.C.I.W.H. Data visualization tools for exploring the global cancer burden in 2020. 2020. 2021.
https://gco.iarc.fr/today/home
13.Leitzmann, M.F., et al. Risk factors for the onset of prostatic cancer: age, location, and behavioral correlates. Clin Epidemiol, 2012. 4: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22291478
14.Cook, L.S., et al. Incidence of adenocarcinoma of the prostate in Asian immigrants to the United States and their descendants. J Urol, 1999. 161: 152.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10037388
15.Nyame, Y.A., et al. Deconstructing, Addressing, and Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Prostate Cancer Care. Eur Urol, 2022. 82: 341.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35367082
16.Karami, S., et al. Earlier age at diagnosis: another dimension in cancer disparity? Cancer Detect Prev, 2007. 31: 29.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17303347
17.Sanchez-Ortiz, R.F., et al. African-American men with nonpalpable prostate cancer exhibit greater tumor volume than matched white men. Cancer, 2006. 107: 75.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16736511
18.Chen, F., et al. Evidence of Novel Susceptibility Variants for Prostate Cancer and a Multiancestry Polygenic Risk Score Associated with Aggressive Disease in Men of African Ancestry. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36872133
19.Freedland, S.J., et al. The impact of race on survival in metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic literature review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 461.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37592001
20.Patki, S., et al. A Systematic Review of Patient Race, Ethnicity, Socioeconomic Status, and Educational Attainment in Prostate Cancer Treatment Randomised Trials-Is the Evidence Base Applicable to the General Patient Population? Eur Urol Open Sci, 2023. 54: 56.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37545851
21.Mahal, B.A., et al. Prostate Cancer Racial Disparities: A Systematic Review by the Prostate Cancer Foundation Panel. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 18.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34446369
22.Ma, T.M., et al. Race-dependent association of clinical trial participation with improved outcomes for high-risk prostate cancer patients treated in the modern era. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 625.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36966268
23.Barlow, M., et al. Ethnic differences in prostate-specific antigen levels in men without prostate cancer: a systematic review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 249.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36456698
24.Bratt, O., et al. Family History and Probability of Prostate Cancer, Differentiated by Risk Category: A Nationwide Population-Based Study. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2016. 108.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27400876
25.Beebe-Dimmer, J.L., et al. Risk of Prostate Cancer Associated With Familial and Hereditary Cancer Syndromes. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 1807.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32208047
26.Brook, M.N., et al. Family History of Prostate Cancer and Survival Outcomes in the UK Genetic Prostate Cancer Study. Eur Urol, 2023. 83: 257.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36528478
27.Breast Cancer Association, C., et al. Breast Cancer Risk Genes - Association Analysis in More than 113,000 Women. N Engl J Med, 2021. 384: 428.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33471991
28.Nicolosi, P., et al. Prevalence of Germline Variants in Prostate Cancer and Implications for Current Genetic Testing Guidelines. JAMA Oncol, 2019. 5: 523.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30730552
29.Giri, V.N., et al. Germline genetic testing for inherited prostate cancer in practice: Implications for genetic testing, precision therapy, and cascade testing. Prostate, 2019. 79: 333.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30450585
30.Pritchard, C.C., et al. Inherited DNA-Repair Gene Mutations in Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2016. 375: 443.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27433846
31.Castro, E., et al. PROREPAIR-B: A Prospective Cohort Study of the Impact of Germline DNA Repair Mutations on the Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2019. 37: 490.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30625039
32.Ewing, C.M., et al. Germline mutations in HOXB13 and prostate-cancer risk. N Engl J Med, 2012. 366: 141.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22236224
33.Lynch, H.T., et al. Screening for familial and hereditary prostate cancer. Int J Cancer, 2016. 138: 2579.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26638190
34.Nyberg, T., et al. Prostate Cancer Risks for Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: A Prospective Cohort Study. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 24.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31495749
35.Castro, E., et al. Germline BRCA mutations are associated with higher risk of nodal involvement, distant metastasis, and poor survival outcomes in prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2013. 31: 1748.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23569316
36.Castro, E., et al. Effect of BRCA Mutations on Metastatic Relapse and Cause-specific Survival After Radical Treatment for Localised Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 186.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25454609
37.Na, R., et al. Germline Mutations in ATM and BRCA1/2 Distinguish Risk for Lethal and Indolent Prostate Cancer and are Associated with Early Age at Death. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 740.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27989354
38.Wang, Y., et al. CHEK2 mutation and risk of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2015. 8: 15708.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26629066
39.Zhen, J.T., et al. Genetic testing for hereditary prostate cancer: Current status and limitations. Cancer, 2018. 124: 3105.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29669169
40.Edwards, S.M., et al. Two percent of men with early-onset prostate cancer harbor germline mutations in the BRCA2 gene. Am J Hum Genet, 2003. 72: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12474142
41.Agalliu, I., et al. Rare germline mutations in the BRCA2 gene are associated with early-onset prostate cancer. Br J Cancer, 2007. 97: 826.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17700570
42.Leongamornlert, D., et al. Frequent germline deleterious mutations in DNA repair genes in familial prostate cancer cases are associated with advanced disease. Br J Cancer, 2014. 110: 1663.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24556621
43.Karlsson, R., et al. A population-based assessment of germline HOXB13 G84E mutation and prostate cancer risk. Eur Urol, 2014. 65: 169.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22841674
44.Storebjerg, T.M., et al. Prevalence of the HOXB13 G84E mutation in Danish men undergoing radical prostatectomy and its correlations with prostate cancer risk and aggressiveness. BJU Int, 2016. 118: 646.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26779768
45.Leongamornlert, D., et al. Germline BRCA1 mutations increase prostate cancer risk. Br J Cancer, 2012. 106: 1697.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22516946
46.Thompson, D., et al. Cancer Incidence in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2002. 94: 1358.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12237281
47.Ryan, S., et al. Risk of prostate cancer in Lynch syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2014. 23: 437.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24425144
48.Carlsson, S., et al. Influence of blood prostate specific antigen levels at age 60 on benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening: population based cohort study. BMJ, 2014. 348: g2296.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24682399
49.Rosty, C., et al. High prevalence of mismatch repair deficiency in prostate cancers diagnosed in mismatch repair gene mutation carriers from the colon cancer family registry. Fam Cancer, 2014. 13: 573.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25117503
50.Siltari, A., et al. How Well do Polygenic Risk Scores Identify Men at High Risk for Prostate Cancer? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2023. 21: 316 e1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36243664
51.Klein, R.J., et al. Prostate cancer polygenic risk score and prediction of lethal prostate cancer. NPJ Precis Oncol, 2022. 6: 25.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35396534
52.Plym, A., et al. Evaluation of a Multiethnic Polygenic Risk Score Model for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2022. 114: 771.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33792693
53.Blanc-Lapierre, A., et al. Metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer risk in a population-based case-control study in Montreal, Canada. BMC Public Health, 2015. 15: 913.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26385727
54.Iheanacho, C.O., et al. Role of antihypertensive medicines in prostate cancer: a systematic review. BMC Cancer, 2024. 24: 542.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38684963
55.Vidal, A.C., et al. Obesity increases the risk for high-grade prostate cancer: results from the REDUCE study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2014. 23: 2936.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25261967
56.Davies, N.M., et al. The effects of height and BMI on prostate cancer incidence and mortality: a Mendelian randomization study in 20,848 cases and 20,214 controls from the PRACTICAL consortium. Cancer Causes Control, 2015. 26: 1603.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26387087
57.Rivera-Izquierdo, M., et al. Obesity as a Risk Factor for Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of 280,199 Patients. Cancers (Basel), 2021. 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34439328
58.Ramadani, F.G., et al. Body mass index, obesity and risk of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cent European J Urol, 2024. 77: 176.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39345322
59.Ling, S., et al. Risk of cancer incidence and mortality associated with diabetes: A systematic review with trend analysis of 203 cohorts. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis, 2021. 31: 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33223399
60.Drab, A., et al. Diabetes Mellitus and Prostate Cancer Risk-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel), 2024. 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39682196
61.Preston, M.A., et al. Metformin use and prostate cancer risk. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 1012.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24857538
62.Coyle, C., et al. Metformin as an adjuvant treatment for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol, 2016. 27: 2184.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27681864
63.Feng, T., et al. Metformin use and risk of prostate cancer: results from the REDUCE study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila), 2015. 8: 1055.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26353947
64.Gillessen, S., et al. Metformin for patients with metastatic prostate cancer starting androgen deprivation therapy: a randomised phase 3 trial of the STAMPEDE platform protocol. Lancet Oncol, 2025. 26: 1018.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40639383
65.Cao, Z., et al. Association Between Statin Exposure and Incidence and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis Based on Observational Studies. Am J Clin Oncol, 2023. 46: 323.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37143189
66.Li, Y., et al. Effect of Statins on the Risk of Different Stages of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Urol Int, 2022. 106: 869.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34518476
67.Dickerman, B.A., et al. Alcohol intake, drinking patterns, and prostate cancer risk and mortality: a 30-year prospective cohort study of Finnish twins. Cancer Causes Control, 2016. 27: 1049.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27351919
68.D'Ecclesiis, O., et al. Association between Alcohol Intake and Prostate Cancer Mortality and Survival. Nutrients, 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36839283
69.Chen, X., et al. Coffee consumption and risk of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 2021. 11: e038902.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33431520
70.Zhao, Z., et al. The association between dairy products consumption and prostate cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Nutr, 2023. 129: 1714.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35945656
71.Xiong, K., et al. Calcium intake and risk of prostate cancer: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. J Trace Elem Med Biol, 2025. 89: 127652.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40222344
72.Alexander, D.D., et al. Meta-Analysis of Long-Chain Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids (LComega-3PUFA) and Prostate Cancer. Nutr Cancer, 2015. 67: 543.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25826711
73.Lippi, G., et al. Fried food and prostate cancer risk: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Food Sci Nutr, 2015. 66: 587.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26114920
74.Fichtel-Epstein, C., et al. Ultra-Processed Food and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel), 2024. 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39682140
75.Kristal, A.R., et al. Plasma vitamin D and prostate cancer risk: results from the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2014. 23: 1494.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24732629
76.Nyame, Y.A., et al. Associations Between Serum Vitamin D and Adverse Pathology in Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 1345.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26903577
77.Ilic, D., et al. Lycopene for the prevention and treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer: a systematic review. Maturitas, 2012. 72: 269.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22633187
78.Feiertag, N., et al. Should Men Eat More Plants? A Systematic Review of the Literature on the Effect of Plant-Forward Diets on Men's Health. Urology, 2023. 176: 7.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36963667
79.Long, J., et al. Cruciferous Vegetable Intake and Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urol Int, 2023. 107: 723.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37343525
80.Bylsma, L.C., et al. A review and meta-analysis of prospective studies of red and processed meat, meat cooking methods, heme iron, heterocyclic amines and prostate cancer. Nutr J, 2015. 14: 125.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26689289
81.Nouri-Majd, S., et al. Association Between Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Nutr, 2022. 9: 801722.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35198587
82.Eshaghian, N., et al. Fish consumption and risk of prostate cancer or its mortality: an updated systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Front Nutr, 2023. 10: 1221029.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37593679
83.Applegate, C.C., et al. Soy Consumption and the Risk of Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients, 2018. 10.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29300347
84.Huang, Y., et al. Association between soy products and prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Investig Clin Urol, 2024. 65: 540.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39505513
85.Cui, Z., et al. Serum selenium levels and prostate cancer risk: A MOOSE-compliant meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore), 2017. 96: e5944.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28151881
86.Allen, N.E., et al. Selenium and Prostate Cancer: Analysis of Individual Participant Data From Fifteen Prospective Studies. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2016. 108.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27385803
87.Lippman, S.M., et al. Effect of selenium and vitamin E on risk of prostate cancer and other cancers: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT). JAMA, 2009. 301: 39.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19066370
88.Baboudjian, M., et al. Association Between 5alpha-Reductase Inhibitors and Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol, 2023. 9: 847.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37079318
89.Knijnik, P.G., et al. The impact of 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors on mortality in a prostate cancer chemoprevention setting: a meta-analysis. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 365.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32314009
90.Thompson, I.M., et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2003. 349: 215.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12824459
91.Haider, A., et al. Incidence of prostate cancer in hypogonadal men receiving testosterone therapy: observations from 5-year median followup of 3 registries. J Urol, 2015. 193: 80.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24980615
92.Watts, E.L., et al. Low Free Testosterone and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Collaborative Analysis of 20 Prospective Studies. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 585.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30077399
93.Golla, V., et al. Testosterone Therapy on Active Surveillance and Following Definitive Treatment for Prostate Cancer. Curr Urol Rep, 2017. 18: 49.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28589395
94.Lophatananon, A., et al. Height, selected genetic markers and prostate cancer risk: results from the PRACTICAL consortium. Br J Cancer, 2017. 117: 734.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28765617
95.Burns, J.A., et al. Inflammatory Bowel Disease and the Risk of Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 846.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30528221
96.Multigner, L., et al. Chlordecone exposure and risk of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28: 3457.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20566993
97.Moon, J., et al. Risk of prostate cancer with increasing years of night shift work: A two-stage dose-response meta-analysis with duration of night shift work as exposure dose. Heliyon, 2024. 10: e29080.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38628771
98.Firmani, G., et al. The Association Between Cadmium Exposure and Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2024. 21.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39595799
99.Islami, F., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of tobacco use and prostate cancer mortality and incidence in prospective cohort studies. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 1054.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25242554
100.Brookman-May, S.D., et al. Latest Evidence on the Impact of Smoking, Sports, and Sexual Activity as Modifiable Lifestyle Risk Factors for Prostate Cancer Incidence, Recurrence, and Progression: A Systematic Review of the Literature by the European Association of Urology Section of Oncological Urology (ESOU). Eur Urol Focus, 2019. 5: 756.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29576530
101.Russo, G.I., et al. Human papillomavirus and risk of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Male, 2020. 23: 132.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29571270
102.Lian, W.Q., et al. Gonorrhea and Prostate Cancer Incidence: An Updated Meta-Analysis of 21 Epidemiologic Studies. Med Sci Monit, 2015. 21: 1902.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26126881
103.Wang, Y., et al. Assessing the causal relationship between gut microbiota and prostate cancer: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Urol Oncol, 2025. 43: 190 e1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39448300
104.Lin, S.W., et al. Prospective study of ultraviolet radiation exposure and risk of cancer in the United States. Int J Cancer, 2012. 131: E1015.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22539073
105.Pabalan, N., et al. Association of male circumcision with risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2015. 18: 352.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26215783
106.Rider, J.R., et al. Ejaculation Frequency and Risk of Prostate Cancer: Updated Results with an Additional Decade of Follow-up. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 974.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27033442
107.Bhindi, B., et al. The Association Between Vasectomy and Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med, 2017. 177: 1273.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28715534
108.Cremers, R.G., et al. Self-reported acne is not associated with prostate cancer. Urol Oncol, 2014. 32: 941.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25011577
109.Brierley, J.D., et al., TNM classification of malignant tumors. UICC International Union Against Cancer. 9th edn. 2025.
http://www.uicc.org/tnm/
110.D'Amico, A.V., et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Jama, 1998. 280: 969.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9749478/
111.Zelic, R., et al. Predicting Prostate Cancer Death with Different Pretreatment Risk Stratification Tools: A Head-to-head Comparison in a Nationwide Cohort Study. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 180.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31606332
112.Lophatananon, A., et al. Assessing the impact of MRI based diagnostics on pre-treatment disease classification and prognostic model performance in men diagnosed with new prostate cancer from an unscreened population. BMC Cancer, 2022. 22: 878.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35953766
113.Ploussard, G., et al. Decreased accuracy of the prostate cancer EAU risk group classification in the era of imaging-guided diagnostic pathway: proposal for a new classification based on MRI-targeted biopsies and early oncologic outcomes after surgery. World J Urol, 2020. 38: 2493.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31838560
114.Ceci, F., et al. E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2021. 48: 1626.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33604691
115.van den Bergh, R.C.N., et al. Re: Andrew Vickers, Sigrid V. Carlsson, Matthew Cooperberg. Routine Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Early Detection of Prostate Cancer Is Not Justified by the Clinical Trial Evidence. Eur Urol 2020;78:304-6: Prebiopsy MRI: Through the Looking Glass. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 310.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32660749
116.Epstein, J.I., et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 2005. 29: 1228.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16096414
117.Epstein, J.I., et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. Am J Surg Pathol, 2016. 40: 244.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26492179
118.van Leenders, G., et al. The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 2020. 44: e87.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32459716
119.Epstein, J.I., et al. A Contemporary Prostate Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 428.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26166626
120.Moyer, V.A., et al. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med, 2012. 157: 120.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22801674
121.Sauter, G., et al. Integrating Tertiary Gleason 5 Patterns into Quantitative Gleason Grading in Prostate Biopsies and Prostatectomy Specimens. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 674.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28117112
122.Anderson, B.B., et al. Extraprostatic Extension Is Extremely Rare for Contemporary Gleason Score 6 Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2017. 72: 455.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27986368
123.Ross, H.M., et al. Do adenocarcinomas of the prostate with Gleason score (GS) </=6 have the potential to metastasize to lymph nodes? Am J Surg Pathol, 2012. 36: 1346.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22531173
124.Alberts, A.R., et al. Biopsy undergrading in men with Gleason score 6 and fatal prostate cancer in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Rotterdam. Int J Urol, 2017. 24: 281.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28173626
125.Tilki, D., et al. Mortality Risk for Patients with Biopsy Gleason Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38960834
126.Baboudjian, M., et al. Grade group 1 prostate cancer on biopsy: are we still missing aggressive disease in the era of image-directed therapy? World J Urol, 2022. 40: 2423.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35980449
127.Stroomberg, H.V., et al. Outcomes of Biopsy Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in the Danish Population. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 770.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37884421
128.Zareba, P., et al. The impact of the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus on Gleason grading in contemporary practice. Histopathology, 2009. 55: 384.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19817888
129.Goel, S., et al. Concordance Between Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Pathology in the Era of Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2020. 3: 10.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31492650
130.Wang, Y., et al. Predictive Factors for Gleason Score Upgrading in Patients with Prostate Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urol Int, 2023. 107: 460.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36990065
131.Schoots, I.G., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol, 2015. 67: 627.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25511988
132.Jain, S., et al. Gleason Upgrading with Time in a Large Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Cohort. J Urol, 2015. 194: 79.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25660208
133.Inoue, L.Y., et al. Modeling grade progression in an active surveillance study. Stat Med, 2014. 33: 930.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24123208
134.Van der Kwast, T.H., et al. Defining the threshold for significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol, 2013. 10: 473.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23712205
135.Kasivisvanathan, V., et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med, 2018. 378: 1767.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29552975
136.Emmett, L., et al. The Additive Diagnostic Value of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography to Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Triage in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PRIMARY): A Prospective Multicentre Study. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 682.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34465492
137.Ahmed, H.U., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet, 2017. 389: 815.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28110982
138.Thompson, J.E., et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study. J Urol, 2014. 192: 67.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24518762
139.Kane, C.J., et al. Variability in Outcomes for Patients with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 7, International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Group 2-3) and Implications for Risk Stratification: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Focus, 2017. 3: 487.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28753804
140.Zumsteg, Z.S., et al. Unification of favourable intermediate-, unfavourable intermediate-, and very high-risk stratification criteria for prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2017. 120: E87.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28464446
141.Gnanapragasam, V.J., et al. Improving Clinical Risk Stratification at Diagnosis in Primary Prostate Cancer: A Prognostic Modelling Study. PLoS Med, 2016. 13: e1002063.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27483464
142.Gnanapragasam, V.J., et al. The Cambridge Prognostic Groups for improved prediction of disease mortality at diagnosis in primary non-metastatic prostate cancer: a validation study. BMC Med, 2018. 16: 31.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29490658
143.Parry, M.G., et al. Risk stratification for prostate cancer management: value of the Cambridge Prognostic Group classification for assessing treatment allocation. BMC Med, 2020. 18: 114.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32460859
144.Janes, J.L., et al. The 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Test Is Prognostic for Outcomes After Primary External Beam Radiation Therapy in Men With Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2023. 115: 120.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36306979
145.Cullen, J., et al. A Biopsy-based 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score Predicts Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy and Adverse Surgical Pathology in a Racially Diverse Population of Men with Clinically Low- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 123.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25465337
146.Van Den Eeden, S.K., et al. A Biopsy-based 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score as a Predictor of Metastases and Prostate Cancer Death in Surgically Treated Men with Clinically Localized Disease. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 129.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28988753
147.Yu, Y., et al. Impact of cribriform pattern 4 and intraductal prostatic carcinoma on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Cancer of Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) patient stratification. Mod Pathol, 2022. 35: 1695.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35676330
148.Downes, M.R., et al. Addition of Cribriform and Intraductal Carcinoma Presence to Prostate Biopsy Reporting Strengthens Pretreatment Risk Stratification Using CAPRA and NCCN Tools. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2024. 22: 47.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37558528
149.Mazzone, E., et al. Risk Stratification of Patients Candidate to Radical Prostatectomy Based on Clinical and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters: Development and External Validation of Novel Risk Groups. Eur Urol, 2022. 81: 193.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34399996
150.Kensler, K.H., et al. Prostate Cancer Screening in African American Men: A Review of the Evidence. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2023.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37713266
151.Page, E.C., et al. Interim Results from the IMPACT Study: Evidence for Prostate-specific Antigen Screening in BRCA2 Mutation Carriers. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 831.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31537406
152.Bokhorst, L.P., et al. Prostate-specific antigen-based prostate cancer screening: reduction of prostate cancer mortality after correction for nonattendance and contamination in the Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2014. 65: 329.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23954085
153.Arnsrud Godtman, R., et al. Opportunistic testing versus organized prostate-specific antigen screening: outcome after 18 years in the Goteborg randomized population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 354.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25556937
154.Vickers, A.J., et al. Prostate specific antigen concentration at age 60 and death or metastasis from prostate cancer: case-control study. BMJ, 2010. 341: c4521.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20843935
155.Bjerner, J., et al. Baseline Serum Prostate-specific Antigen Value Predicts the Risk of Subsequent Prostate Cancer Death-Results from the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Consortium. Eur Urol, 2023.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37169639
156.Vickers, A.J., et al. Strategy for detection of prostate cancer based on relation between prostate specific antigen at age 40-55 and long term risk of metastasis: case-control study. BMJ, 2013. 346: f2023.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23596126
157.Remmers, S., et al. Relationship Between Baseline Prostate-specific Antigen on Cancer Detection and Prostate Cancer Death: Long-term Follow-up from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 503.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37088597
158.Hugosson, J., et al. A 16-yr Follow-up of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 43.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30824296
159.Boyle, H.J., et al. Updated recommendations of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology on prostate cancer management in older patients. Eur J Cancer, 2019. 116: 116.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31195356
160.Loeb, S., et al. Pathological characteristics of prostate cancer detected through prostate specific antigen based screening. J Urol, 2006. 175: 902.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16469576
161.Ilic, D., et al. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2013. 2013: CD004720.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23440794
162.Ilic, D., et al. Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 2018. 362: k3519.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30185521
163.Hayes, J.H., et al. Screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test: a review of current evidence. JAMA, 2014. 311: 1143.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24643604
164.Martin, R.M., et al. Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2024. 331: 1460.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38581198
165.Schroder, F.H., et al. ERSPC and PLCO prostate cancer screening studies: what are the differences? Eur Urol, 2010. 58: 46.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20362385
166.Roobol, M.J., et al. European Study of Prostate Cancer Screening - 23-Year Follow-up. N Engl J Med, 2025. 393: 1669.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/41160819
167.Independent, U.K.P.o.B.C.S. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet, 2012. 380: 1778.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23117178
168.de, V., II, et al. A Detailed Evaluation of the Effect of Prostate-specific Antigen-based Screening on Morbidity and Mortality of Prostate Cancer: 21-year Follow-up Results of the Rotterdam Section of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 426.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37029074
169.Hugosson, J., et al. Eighteen-year follow-up of the Goteborg Randomized Population-based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial: effect of sociodemographic variables on participation, prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Scand J Urol, 2018. 52: 27.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29254399
170.Franlund, M., et al. Results from 22 years of Followup in the Goteborg Randomized Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening Trial. J Urol, 2022. 208: 292.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35422134
171.Heijnsdijk, E.A., et al. Quality-of-life effects of prostate-specific antigen screening. N Engl J Med, 2012. 367: 595.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22894572
172.Vasarainen, H., et al. Effects of prostate cancer screening on health-related quality of life: results of the Finnish arm of the European randomized screening trial (ERSPC). Acta Oncol, 2013. 52: 1615.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23786174
173.Fazekas, T., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JAMA Oncol, 2024. 10: 745.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38576242
174.Hugosson, J., et al. Results after Four Years of Screening for Prostate Cancer with PSA and MRI. N Engl J Med, 2024. 391: 1083.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39321360
175.Discacciati, A., et al. Repeat Prostate Cancer Screening using Blood-based Risk Prediction or Prostate-specific Antigen in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided Biopsies : A Secondary Analysis of the STHLM3-MRI Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39562218
176.Auvinen, A., et al. Prostate Cancer Screening With PSA, Kallikrein Panel, and MRI: The ProScreen Randomized Trial. JAMA, 2024. 331: 1452.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38581254
177.Al-Monajjed, R., et al. Prostate Cancer Detection in Younger Men: A Comparative Analysis of Systematic and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy in the PROBASE Trial. Eur Urol, 2025. 88: 240.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40461322
178.Vynckier, P., et al. Systematic Review on the Cost Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe. Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 400.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38789306
179.Martin, R.M., et al. Effect of a Low-Intensity PSA-Based Screening Intervention on Prostate Cancer Mortality: The CAP Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2018. 319: 883.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29509864
180.Gelfond, J., et al. Intermediate-Term Risk of Prostate Cancer is Directly Related to Baseline Prostate Specific Antigen: Implications for Reducing the Burden of Prostate Specific Antigen Screening. J Urol, 2015. 194: 46.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25686543
181.Roobol, M.J., et al. Improving the Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator for Initial Prostate Biopsy by Incorporating the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Grading and Cribriform growth. Eur Urol, 2017. 72: 45.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28162815
182.Bancroft, E.K., et al. Targeted prostate cancer screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the initial screening round of the IMPACT study. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 489.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24484606
183.Bancroft, E.K., et al. A prospective prostate cancer screening programme for men with pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes (IMPACT): initial results from an international prospective study. Lancet Oncol, 2021. 22: 1618.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34678156
184.Mark, J.R., et al. Genetic Testing Guidelines and Education of Health Care Providers Involved in Prostate Cancer Care. Urol Clin North Am, 2021. 48: 311.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34210487
185.Giri, V.N., et al. Implementation of Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 2798.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32516092
186.John, E.M., et al. Prevalence of pathogenic BRCA1 mutation carriers in 5 US racial/ethnic groups. JAMA, 2007. 298: 2869.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18159056
187.Carvalhal, G.F., et al. Digital rectal examination for detecting prostate cancer at prostate specific antigen levels of 4 ng./ml. or less. J Urol, 1999. 161: 835.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10022696
188.Gosselaar, C., et al. The role of the digital rectal examination in subsequent screening visits in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC), Rotterdam. Eur Urol, 2008. 54: 581.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18423977
189.Okotie, O.T., et al. Characteristics of prostate cancer detected by digital rectal examination only. Urology, 2007. 70: 1117.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18158030
190.Herrera-Caceres, J.O., et al. Utility of digital rectal examination in a population with prostate cancer treated with active surveillance. Can Urol Assoc J, 2020. 14: E453.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32223879
191.Prebay, Z.J., et al. The prognostic value of digital rectal exam for the existence of advanced pathologic features after prostatectomy. Prostate, 2021. 81: 1064.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34297858
192.Stamey, T.A., et al. Prostate-specific antigen as a serum marker for adenocarcinoma of the prostate. N Engl J Med, 1987. 317: 909.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2442609
193.Semjonow, A., et al. Discordance of assay methods creates pitfalls for the interpretation of prostate-specific antigen values. Prostate Suppl, 1996. 7: 3.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8950358
194.Thompson, I.M., et al. Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level < or =4.0 ng per milliliter. N Engl J Med, 2004. 350: 2239.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15163773
195.Schroder, F.H., et al. Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up. N Engl J Med, 2012. 366: 981.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22417251
196.Merriel, S.W.D., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for the detection of prostate cancer in symptomatic patients. BMC Med, 2022. 20: 54.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35125113
197.Habib, F.K., et al. Differential effect of finasteride on the tissue androgen concentrations in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf), 1997. 46: 137.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9135694
198.Roehrborn, C.G., et al. Variability of repeated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements within less than 90 days in a well-defined patient population. Urology, 1996. 47: 59.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8560664
199.Nordstrom, T., et al. Repeat Prostate-Specific Antigen Tests Before Prostate Biopsy Decisions. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2016. 108.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27418620
200.Rosario, D.J., et al. Contribution of a single repeat PSA test to prostate cancer risk assessment: experience from the ProtecT study. Eur Urol, 2008. 53: 777.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18079051
201.Eastham, J.A., et al. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol, 2003. 170: 2292.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14634399
202.Stephan, C., et al. Interchangeability of measurements of total and free prostate-specific antigen in serum with 5 frequently used assay combinations: an update. Clin Chem, 2006. 52: 59.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16391327
203.Gill, N., et al. Prostate-Specific Antigen: a Review of Assay Techniques, Variability and Their Clinical Implications. BioNanoScience, 2017. 8: 707.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12668-017-0465-4
204.Yan, Y. Intraindividual variation of prostate specific antigen measurement and implications for early detection of prostate carcinoma. Cancer, 2001. 92: 776.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11550147
205.el-Shirbiny, A.M. Prostatic specific antigen. Adv Clin Chem, 1994. 31: 99.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7533474
206.Zackrisson, B., et al. Evolution of free, complexed, and total serum prostate-specific antigen and their ratios during 1 year of follow-up of men with febrile urinary tract infection. Urology, 2003. 62: 278.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12893335
207.Aliasgari, M., et al. The effect of acute urinary retention on serum prostate-specific antigen level. Urol J, 2005. 2: 89.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17629877
208.Oesterling, J.E., et al. Effect of cystoscopy, prostate biopsy, and transurethral resection of prostate on serum prostate-specific antigen concentration. Urology, 1993. 42: 276.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7691013
209.Kim, D.K., et al. Association between prostate-specific antigen and serum testosterone: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrology, 2020. 8: 1194.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32329181
210.Massengill, J.C., et al. Pretreatment total testosterone level predicts pathological stage in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. J Urol, 2003. 169: 1670.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12686805
211.Yuan, J.J., et al. Effects of rectal examination, prostatic massage, ultrasonography and needle biopsy on serum prostate specific antigen levels. J Urol, 1992. 147: 810.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1371553
212.Maggi, M., et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 Category Cases at Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2020. 6: 463.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31279677
213.Nordstrom, T., et al. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density in the diagnostic algorithm of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2018. 21: 57.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29259293
214.Yusim, I., et al. The use of prostate specific antigen density to predict clinically significant prostate cancer. Sci Rep, 2020. 10: 20015.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33203873
215.Denijs, F.B., et al. Risk calculators for the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024. 27: 544.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38830997
216.Roehrborn, C.G., et al. Correlation between prostate size estimated by digital rectal examination and measured by transrectal ultrasound. Urology, 1997. 49: 548.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9111624
217.Hamzaoui, D., et al. Prostate volume prediction on MRI: tools, accuracy and variability. Eur Radiol, 2022. 32: 4931.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35169895
218.Choe, S., et al. MRI vs Transrectal Ultrasound to Estimate Prostate Volume and PSAD: Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection. Urology, 2023. 171: 172.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36152871
219.de, V., II, et al. Prostate cancer risk assessment by the primary care physician and urologist: transabdominal- versus transrectal ultrasound prostate volume-based use of the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator. Transl Androl Urol, 2023. 12: 241.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36915892
220.Wang, S., et al. Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Antigen Density for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 189.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37640584
221.Haj-Mirzaian, A., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Clinical, and Biopsy Findings in Suspected Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JAMA Netw Open, 2024. 7: e244258.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38551559
222.Bratan, F., et al. Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study. Eur Radiol, 2013. 23: 2019.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23494494
223.Borofsky, S., et al. What Are We Missing? False-Negative Cancers at Multiparametric MR Imaging of the Prostate. Radiology, 2018. 286: 186.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29053402
224.Johnson, D.C., et al. Detection of Individual Prostate Cancer Foci via Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 712.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30509763
225.Yaxley, W.J., et al. Histological findings of totally embedded robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) specimens in 1197 men with a negative (low risk) preoperative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) prostate lobe and clinical implications. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 398.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32999464
226.Drost, F.H., et al. Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019. 4: CD012663.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31022301
227.Turkbey, B., et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 340.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30898406
228.Weinreb, J.C., et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26427566
229.Oerther, B., et al. Update on PI-RADS Version 2.1 Diagnostic Performance Benchmarks for Prostate MRI: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Radiology, 2024. 312: e233337.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39136561
230.Schoots, I.G., et al. Risk-adapted biopsy decision based on prostate magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density for enhanced biopsy avoidance in first prostate cancer diagnostic evaluation. BJU Int, 2021. 127: 175.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33089586
231.Houlahan, K.E., et al. Molecular Hallmarks of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Visibility in Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 18.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30685078
232.Oderda, M., et al. Histopathologic Features and Transcriptomic Signatures Do Not Solve the Issue of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Invisible Prostate Cancers: A Matched-Pair Analysis. Prostate, 2025. 85: 374.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39665170
233.Tan, N., et al. Management of Patients With a Negative Multiparametric Prostate MRI Examination: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2024. 223: e2329969.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37877601
234.Ghai, S., et al. Comparison of Multiparametric MRI-targeted and Systematic Biopsies for Detection of Cribriform and Intraductal Carcinoma Prostate Cancer. Radiology, 2024. 312: e231948.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39012252
235.Cheng, Y., et al. Impact of prostate MRI image quality on diagnostic performance for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Abdom Radiol (NY), 2024. 49: 4113.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38935093
236.Stanzione, A., et al. Expect the unexpected: investigating discordant prostate MRI and biopsy results. Eur Radiol, 2024. 34: 4810.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38503918
237.Barrett, T., et al. Quality checkpoints in the MRI-directed prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Nat Rev Urol, 2023. 20: 9.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36168056
238.de Rooij, M., et al. PI-QUAL version 2: an update of a standardised scoring system for the assessment of image quality of prostate MRI. Eur Radiol, 2024. 34: 7068.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38787428
239.Giganti, F., et al. Global Variation in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Quality of the Prostate. Radiology, 2023. 309: e231130.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37815448
240.Di Franco, F., et al. Characterization of high-grade prostate cancer at multiparametric MRI: assessment of PI-RADS version 2.1 and version 2 descriptors across 21 readers with varying experience (MULTI study). Insights Imaging, 2023. 14: 49.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36939970
241.Schoots, I.G., et al. PI-RADS Committee Position on MRI Without Contrast Medium in Biopsy-Naive Men With Suspected Prostate Cancer: Narrative Review. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2021. 216: 3.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32812795
242.Coelho, F.M.A., et al. Strategies for improving image quality in prostate MRI. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2024. 49: 4556.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38940911
243.Farrell, C., et al. Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Program Implementation and Impact: Initial Clinical Experience in a Community Based Health System. Urol Pract, 2018. 5: 165.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37300235
244.Alabousi, M., et al. Biparametric vs multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of prostate cancer in treatment-naive patients: a diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2019. 124: 209.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30929292
245.Kang, Z., et al. Abbreviated Biparametric Versus Standard Multiparametric MRI for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2019. 212: 357.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30512996
246.Bass, E.J., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric prostate MRI for prostate cancer in men at risk. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 596.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33219368
247.Ng, A., et al. Biparametric vs Multiparametric MRI for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: The PRIME Diagnostic Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2025. 334: 1170.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40928788
248.Twilt, J.J., et al. Evaluating Biparametric Versus Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Diagnosing Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: An International, Paired, Noninferiority, Confirmatory Observer Study. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 240.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39438187
249.Margolis, D.J.A., et al. Quantitative Prostate MRI, From the AJR Special Series on Quantitative Imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2025. 225: e2431715.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39356481
250.Shukla-Dave, A., et al. Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE-MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019. 49: e101.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30451345
251.Hoang-Dinh, A., et al. Reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurement in normal prostate peripheral zone at 1.5T MRI. Diagn Interv Imaging, 2022. 103: 545.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35773099
252.Nakai, H., et al. Prostate Cancer Risk Prediction Model Using Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Related Findings: Impact of Combining Lesions' Locations and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2025. 49: 247.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39761466
253.Padhani, A.R., et al. AI and human interactions in prostate cancer diagnosis using MRI. Eur Radiol, 2025. 35: 5695.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40055229
254.Couchoux, T., et al. Performance of a Region of Interest-based Algorithm in Diagnosing International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group >/=2 Prostate Cancer on the MRI-FIRST Database-CAD-FIRST Study. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 1113.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38493072
255.Cai, J.C., et al. Fully Automated Deep Learning Model to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer at MRI. Radiology, 2024. 312: e232635.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39105640
256.Debs, N., et al. Evaluation of a deep learning prostate cancer detection system on biparametric MRI against radiological reading. Eur Radiol, 2025. 35: 3134.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39699671
257.Lee, Y.J., et al. MRI-based Deep Learning Algorithm for Assisting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection: A Bicenter Prospective Study. Radiology, 2025. 314: e232788.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40067105
258.Saha, A., et al. Artificial intelligence and radiologists in prostate cancer detection on MRI (PI-CAI): an international, paired, non-inferiority, confirmatory study. Lancet Oncol, 2024. 25: 879.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38876123
259.de Almeida, J.G., et al. Impact of Scanner Manufacturer, Endorectal Coil Use, and Clinical Variables on Deep Learning-assisted Prostate Cancer Classification Using Multiparametric MRI. Radiol Artif Intell, 2025. 7: e230555.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39841063
260.Turkbey, B., et al. Requirements for AI Development and Reporting for MRI Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-Naive Men: PI-RADS Steering Committee, Version 1.0. Radiology, 2025. 315: e240140.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40232134
261.Rouviere, O., et al. Artificial intelligence algorithms aimed at characterizing or detecting prostate cancer on MRI: How accurate are they when tested on independent cohorts? - A systematic review. Diagn Interv Imaging, 2023. 104: 221.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36517398
262.Guenzel, K., et al. Diagnostic Utility of Artificial Intelligence-assisted Transperineal Biopsy Planning in Prostate Cancer Suspected Men: A Prospective Cohort Study. Eur Urol Focus, 2024. 10: 833.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38688825
263.Smeenge, M., et al. Role of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in focal therapy of prostate cancer: report from a Consensus Panel. BJU Int, 2012. 110: 942.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22462566
264.Rouviere, O., et al. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 100.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30470502
265.Ghai, S., et al. Assessing Cancer Risk on Novel 29 MHz Micro-Ultrasound Images of the Prostate: Creation of the Micro-Ultrasound Protocol for Prostate Risk Identification. J Urol, 2016. 196: 562.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26791931
266.Hofbauer, S.L., et al. A non-inferiority comparative analysis of micro-ultrasonography and MRI-targeted biopsy in men at risk of prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2022. 129: 648.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34773679
267.Ghai, S., et al. Comparison of Micro-US and Multiparametric MRI for Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-Naive Men. Radiology, 2022. 305: 390.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35852425
268.Cornud, F., et al. Post-MRI transrectal micro-ultrasonography of transition zone PI-RADS > 2 lesions for biopsy guidance. Eur Radiol, 2022. 32: 7504.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35451606
269.Zhou, S.R., et al. Inter-reader Agreement for Prostate Cancer Detection Using Micro-ultrasound: A Multi-institutional Study. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2024. 66: 93.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39076245
270.Kinnaird, A., et al. Microultrasonography-Guided vs MRI-Guided Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: The OPTIMUM Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2025. 333: 1679.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40121537
271.Correas, J.M., et al. Advanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 661.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32306060
272.Mannaerts, C.K., et al. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men: direct comparison of systematic biopsy, multiparametric MRI- and contrast-ultrasound-dispersion imaging-targeted biopsy. BJU Int, 2020. 126: 481.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32315112
273.Grey, A.D.R., et al. Multiparametric ultrasound versus multiparametric MRI to diagnose prostate cancer (CADMUS): a prospective, multicentre, paired-cohort, confirmatory study. Lancet Oncol, 2022. 23: 428.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35240084
274.Kawada, T., et al. Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-targeted biopsy for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 390.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35715320
275.Emmett, L., et al. The PRIMARY Score: Using Intraprostatic (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT Patterns to Optimize Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. J Nucl Med, 2022. 63: 1644.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35301240
276.Emmett, L., et al. Beyond Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System: Combining Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography PRIMARY Score in a Composite (P) Score for More Accurate Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2024. 212: 299.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38758680
277.Herrmann, K., et al. SPARC: The Standardised Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Analysis and Reporting Consensus: A Delphi Analysis. Eur Urol, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40945999
278.Mazzone, E., et al. A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Role of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Primary Staging before Definitive Treatment. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 654.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40155242
279.Kretschmer, A., et al. Biomarkers in prostate cancer - Current clinical utility and future perspectives. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2017. 120: 180.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29198331
280.Wagaskar, V.G., et al. A 4K score/MRI-based nomogram for predicting prostate cancer, clinically significant prostate cancer, and unfavorable prostate cancer. Cancer Rep (Hoboken), 2021. 4: e1357.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33661541
281.Hendriks, R.J., et al. Clinical use of the SelectMDx urinary-biomarker test with or without mpMRI in prostate cancer diagnosis: a prospective, multicenter study in biopsy-naive men. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 1110.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33941866
282.Bryant, R.J., et al. Predicting high-grade cancer at ten-core prostate biopsy using four kallikrein markers measured in blood in the ProtecT study. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015. 107.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25863334
283.Catalona, W.J., et al. A multicenter study of [-2]pro-prostate specific antigen combined with prostate specific antigen and free prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer detection in the 2.0 to 10.0 ng/ml prostate specific antigen range. J Urol, 2011. 185: 1650.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21419439
284.Nordstrom, T., et al. Comparison Between the Four-kallikrein Panel and Prostate Health Index for Predicting Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 139.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25151013
285.Wagaskar, V.G., et al. Clinical Utility of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2021. 28: 9.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34337520
286.Gronberg, H., et al. Prostate Cancer Diagnostics Using a Combination of the Stockholm3 Blood Test and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 722.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30001824
287.Nordstrom, T., et al. Prostate cancer screening using a combination of risk-prediction, MRI, and targeted prostate biopsies (STHLM3-MRI): a prospective, population-based, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol, 2021. 22: 1240.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34391509
288.Morote, J., et al. Improving the Early Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men in the Challenging Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3 Category. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2022. 37: 38.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35243388
289.Ploussard, G., et al. The role of prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) in prostate cancer detection. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther, 2018. 18: 1013.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30016891
290.Van Neste, L., et al. Detection of High-grade Prostate Cancer Using a Urinary Molecular Biomarker-Based Risk Score. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 740.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27108162
291.Maggi, M., et al. SelectMDx and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate for Men Undergoing Primary Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective Assessment in a Multi-Institutional Study. Cancers (Basel), 2021. 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33922626
292.Lendinez-Cano, G., et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy in the detection of high-grade prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who underwent the Select MDx test. Prostate, 2021. 81: 857.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34184761
293.Roumiguie, M., et al. Independent Evaluation of the Respective Predictive Values for High-Grade Prostate Cancer of Clinical Information and RNA Biomarkers after Upfront MRI and Image-Guided Biopsies. Cancers (Basel), 2020. 12.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31991591
294.Tomlins, S.A., et al. Recurrent fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer. Science, 2005. 310: 644.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16254181
295.Tomlins, S.A., et al. Urine TMPRSS2:ERG Plus PCA3 for Individualized Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 45.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25985884
296.Tosoian, J.J., et al. Development and Validation of an 18-Gene Urine Test for High-Grade Prostate Cancer. JAMA Oncol, 2024. 10: 726.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38635241
297.Donovan, M.J., et al. A molecular signature of PCA3 and ERG exosomal RNA from non-DRE urine is predictive of initial prostate biopsy result. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2015. 18: 370.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26345389
298.McKiernan, J., et al. A Novel Urine Exosome Gene Expression Assay to Predict High-grade Prostate Cancer at Initial Biopsy. JAMA Oncol, 2016. 2: 882.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27032035
299.Vedder, M.M., et al. The added value of percentage of free to total prostate-specific antigen, PCA3, and a kallikrein panel to the ERSPC risk calculator for prostate cancer in prescreened men. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 1109.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25168616
300.Lamy, P.J., et al. Prognostic Biomarkers Used for Localised Prostate Cancer Management: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Focus, 2018. 4: 790.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28753865
301.Plas, S., et al. The impact of urine biomarkers for prostate cancer detection-A systematic state of the art review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2025. 210: 104699.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40107435
302.Iczkowski, K.A., et al. Needle core length in sextant biopsy influences prostate cancer detection rate. Urology, 2002. 59: 698.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11992843
303.Egevad, L., et al. Dataset for the reporting of prostate carcinoma in core needle biopsy and transurethral resection and enucleation specimens: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). Pathology, 2019. 51: 11.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30477882
304.Van der Kwast, T., et al. Guidelines on processing and reporting of prostate biopsies: the 2013 update of the pathology committee of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). Virchows Arch, 2013. 463: 367.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23918245
305.Epstein, J.I., et al. Best practices recommendations in the application of immunohistochemistry in the prostate: report from the International Society of Urologic Pathology consensus conference. Am J Surg Pathol, 2014. 38: e6.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25029122
306.Chen, R.C., et al. Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer (Cancer Care Ontario Guideline): American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 2182.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26884580
307.Deng, F.M., et al. Size-adjusted Quantitative Gleason Score as a Predictor of Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 248.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26525839
308.Dean, L.W., et al. Clinical Usefulness of Total Length of Gleason Pattern 4 on Biopsy in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2019. 201: 77.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30076908
309.Perera, M., et al. Oncologic Outcomes of Total Length Gleason Pattern 4 on Biopsy in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2022. 208: 309.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35363038
310.Soon, M.S., et al. Association of absolute amount of pattern 4 disease on prostate biopsy with oncologic outcomes in intermediate-risk prostate cancer A systematic review. Can Urol Assoc J, 2025. 19: 211.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40031947
311.Kweldam, C.F., et al. Disease-specific survival of patients with invasive cribriform and intraductal prostate cancer at diagnostic biopsy. Mod Pathol, 2016. 29: 630.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26939875
312.Kweldam, C.F., et al. On cribriform prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol, 2018. 7: 145.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29594028
313.Russo, G.I., et al. Oncological outcomes of cribriform histology pattern in prostate cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 646.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36216967
314.Marra, G., et al. Impact of Epithelial Histological Types, Subtypes, and Growth Patterns on Oncological Outcomes for Patients with Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Treated with Curative Intent: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 65.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37117107
315.van der Kwast, T.H., et al. ISUP Consensus Definition of Cribriform Pattern Prostate Cancer. Am J Surg Pathol, 2021. 45: 1118.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33999555
316.Zhou, M. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, PIN-like carcinoma, ductal carcinoma, and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate. Mod Pathol, 2018. 31: S71.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29297491
317.Saeter, T., et al. Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate on Diagnostic Needle Biopsy Predicts Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Population-Based Study. Prostate, 2017. 77: 859.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28240424
318.Miura, N., et al. The Prognostic Impact of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2020. 204: 909.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32698712
319.Shah, R.B., et al. Atypical intraductal proliferation detected in prostate needle biopsy is a marker of unsampled intraductal carcinoma and other adverse pathological features: a prospective clinicopathological study of 62 cases with emphasis on pathological outcomes. Histopathology, 2019. 75: 346.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31012493
320.Hickman, R.A., et al. Atypical Intraductal Cribriform Proliferations of the Prostate Exhibit Similar Molecular and Clinicopathologic Characteristics as Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate. Am J Surg Pathol, 2017. 41: 550.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28009609
321.Iczkowski, K.A., et al. International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus on Cancer Precursor Lesions. Working Group 1: The Prostate. Am J Surg Pathol, 2025. 49: e33.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40545966
322.Ji, W.T., et al. The Rate of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer on Repeat Biopsy after a Diagnosis of Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Oncology, 2024. 102: 631.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38061334
323.Pepdjonovic, L., et al. Zero hospital admissions for infection after 577 transperineal prostate biopsies using single-dose cephazolin prophylaxis. World J Urol, 2017. 35: 1199.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27987032
324.Epstein, J.I., et al. The 2019 Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) White Paper on Contemporary Grading of Prostate Cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2021. 145: 461.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32589068
325.Tumours, E.B.W.C.o., WHO Classification of Tumours. Urinary and male genital tumours. 8th ed, ed. I.A.f.R.o. Cancer. Vol. 5th Edn.; vol 8. 2022, Lyon (France).
https://publications.iarc.fr/610
326.Gordetsky, J.B., et al. Histologic findings associated with false-positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging performed for prostate cancer detection. Hum Pathol, 2019. 83: 159.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30179687
327.Srigley, J.R., et al. Controversial issues in Gleason and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) prostate cancer grading: proposed recommendations for international implementation. Pathology, 2019. 51: 463.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31279442
328.Strom, P., et al. Prognostic value of perineural invasion in prostate needle biopsies: a population-based study of patients treated by radical prostatectomy. J Clin Pathol, 2020. 73: 630.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32034057
329.Fleshner, K., et al. Clinical Findings and Treatment Outcomes in Patients with Extraprostatic Extension Identified on Prostate Biopsy. J Urol, 2016. 196: 703.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27049874
330.Karwacki, J., et al. Association of Lymphovascular Invasion with Biochemical Recurrence and Adverse Pathological Characteristics of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2024. 69: 112.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39430411
331.Li, H., et al. Perineural invasion detected in prostate biopsy is a predictor of positive surgical margin of radical prostatectomy specimen: A meta-analysis. Andrologia, 2022. 54: e14395.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35233813
332.Wu, S., et al. Impact of biopsy perineural invasion on the outcomes of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Urol, 2019. 53: 287.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31401922
333.Morozov, A., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence diagnostic accuracy in prostate cancer histology identification and grading. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 681.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37185992
334.Marletta, S., et al. Artificial intelligence-based algorithms for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A systematic review. Am J Clin Pathol, 2024. 161: 526.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38381582
335.Freedland, S.J., et al. Preoperative model for predicting prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy using percent of biopsy tissue with cancer, biopsy Gleason grade and serum prostate specific antigen. J Urol, 2004. 171: 2215.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15126788
336.Grossklaus, D.J., et al. Percent of cancer in the biopsy set predicts pathological findings after prostatectomy. J Urol, 2002. 167: 2032.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11956432
337.Brimo, F., et al. Prognostic value of various morphometric measurements of tumour extent in prostate needle core tissue. Histopathology, 2008. 53: 177.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18752501
338.Eggener, S.E., et al. Molecular Biomarkers in Localized Prostate Cancer: ASCO Guideline. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 1474.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31829902
339.Nguyen, P.L., et al. Analysis of a Biopsy-Based Genomic Classifier in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of the NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9202, 9413, and 9902 Phase 3 Randomized Trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2023. 116: 521.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36596347
340.Spratt, D.E., et al. Genomic Classifier Performance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2023. 117: 370.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37137444
341.de Bono, J., et al. Olaparib for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2020. 382: 2091.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32343890
342.Mateo, J., et al. Genomics of lethal prostate cancer at diagnosis and castration resistance. J Clin Invest, 2020. 130: 1743.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31874108
343.Schweizer, M.T., et al. Concordance of DNA Repair Gene Mutations in Paired Primary Prostate Cancer Samples and Metastatic Tissue or Cell-Free DNA. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34086042
344.Robinson, D., et al. Integrative clinical genomics of advanced prostate cancer. Cell, 2015. 161: 1215.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26000489
345.Matsubara, N., et al. Olaparib Efficacy in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer and BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM Alterations Identified by Testing Circulating Tumor DNA. Clin Cancer Res, 2023. 29: 92.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36318705
346.Chi, K.N., et al. Detection of BRCA1, BRCA2, and ATM Alterations in Matched Tumor Tissue and Circulating Tumor DNA in Patients with Prostate Cancer Screened in PROfound. Clin Cancer Res, 2023. 29: 81.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36043882
347.Iremashvili, V., et al. Partial sampling of radical prostatectomy specimens: detection of positive margins and extraprostatic extension. Am J Surg Pathol, 2013. 37: 219.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23095506
348.Kench, J.G., et al. Dataset for the reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy specimens: updated recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting. Virchows Arch, 2019. 475: 263.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31098802
349.Gandaglia, G., et al. A Novel Nomogram to Identify Candidates for Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Among Patients with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Diagnosed with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Biopsies. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 506.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30342844
350.Partin, A.W., et al. Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium. Urology, 2001. 58: 843.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11744442
351.Magi-Galluzzi, C., et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease. Mod Pathol, 2011. 24: 26.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20802467
352.Lazzereschi, L., et al. Does the extent of extraprostatic extension at radical prostatectomy predict outcome?-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Histopathology, 2024. 85: 727.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39108209
353.van Veggel, B.A., et al. Quantification of extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer: different parameters correlated to biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Histopathology, 2011. 59: 692.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22014050
354.Aydin, H., et al. Positive proximal (bladder neck) margin at radical prostatectomy confers greater risk of biochemical progression. Urology, 2004. 64: 551.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15351591
355.Ploussard, G., et al. The prognostic significance of bladder neck invasion in prostate cancer: is microscopic involvement truly a T4 disease? BJU Int, 2010. 105: 776.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19863529
356.Stamey, T.A., et al. Prostate cancer is highly predictable: a prognostic equation based on all morphological variables in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol, 2000. 163: 1155.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10737486
357.van Oort, I.M., et al. Maximum tumor diameter is not an independent prognostic factor in high-risk localized prostate cancer. World J Urol, 2008. 26: 237.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18265988
358.van der Kwast, T.H., et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 2: T2 substaging and prostate cancer volume. Mod Pathol, 2011. 24: 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20818340
359.Epstein, J.I., et al. Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl, 2005: 34.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16019758
360.Evans, A.J., et al. Interobserver variability between expert urologic pathologists for extraprostatic extension and surgical margin status in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol, 2008. 32: 1503.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18708939
361.Chuang, A.Y., et al. Positive surgical margins in areas of capsular incision in otherwise organ-confined disease at radical prostatectomy: histologic features and pitfalls. Am J Surg Pathol, 2008. 32: 1201.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18580493
362.Hollemans, E., et al. Prostate Carcinoma Grade and Length But Not Cribriform Architecture at Positive Surgical Margins Are Predictive for Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol, 2020. 44: 191.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31592799
363.Cao, D., et al. Ability of linear length of positive margin in radical prostatectomy specimens to predict biochemical recurrence. Urology, 2011. 77: 1409.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21256540
364.John, A., et al. Length of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: Does size matter? - A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 673.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36859711
365.Sammon, J.D., et al. Risk factors for biochemical recurrence following radical perineal prostatectomy in a large contemporary series: a detailed assessment of margin extent and location. Urol Oncol, 2013. 31: 1470.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22534086
366.Chapin, B.F., et al. Positive margin length and highest Gleason grade of tumor at the margin predict for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in patients with organ-confined prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2018. 21: 221.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29230008
367.Reesink, D.J., et al. Comparison of risk-calculator and MRI and consecutive pathways as upfront stratification for prostate biopsy. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 2453.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33090259
368.Louie, K.S., et al. Do prostate cancer risk models improve the predictive accuracy of PSA screening? A meta-analysis. Ann Oncol, 2015. 26: 848.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25403590
369.Mannaerts, C.K., et al. Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment in Biopsy-naïve Patients: The Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator in Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS) Fusion Biopsy and Systematic TRUS Biopsy. Eur Urol Oncol, 2018. 1: 109.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31100233
370.Kim, L., et al. Clinical utility and cost modelling of the phi test to triage referrals into image-based diagnostic services for suspected prostate cancer: the PRIM (Phi to RefIne Mri) study. BMC Med, 2020. 18: 95.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32299423
371.Morote, J., et al. A Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Predictive Model Using Digital Rectal Examination Prostate Volume Category to Stratify Initial Prostate Cancer Suspicion and Reduce Magnetic Resonance Imaging Demand. Cancers (Basel), 2022. 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36291883
372.Moldovan, P.C., et al. What Is the Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Prostate Cancer at Biopsy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol, 2017. 72: 250.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28336078
373.Kamal, O., et al. Intermediate-term oncological outcomes after a negative endorectal coil multiparametric MRI of the prostate in patients without biopsy proven prostate cancer. Clin Imaging, 2022. 92: 112.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36306588
374.Hamm, C.A., et al. Oncological Safety of MRI-Informed Biopsy Decision-Making in Men With Suspected Prostate Cancer. JAMA Oncol, 2025. 11: 145.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39666360
375.van der Leest, M., et al. Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naive Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 570.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30477981
376.Wagensveld, I.M., et al. A Prospective Multicenter Comparison Study of Risk-adapted Ultrasound-directed and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-directed Diagnostic Pathways for Suspected Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-naive Men. Eur Urol, 2022. 82: 318.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35341658
377.Distler, F.A., et al. The Value of PSA Density in Combination with PI-RADS for the Accuracy of Prostate Cancer Prediction. J Urol, 2017. 198: 575.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28373135
378.Washino, S., et al. Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naive patients. BJU Int, 2017. 119: 225.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26935594
379.Hansen, N.L., et al. Multicentre evaluation of targeted and systematic biopsies using magnetic resonance and ultrasound image-fusion guided transperineal prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy. BJU Int, 2017. 120: 631.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27862869
380.Pagniez, M.A., et al. Predictive Factors of Missed Clinically Significant Prostate Cancers in Men with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2020. 204: 24.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31967522
381.Boesen, L., et al. Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Detecting and Ruling out Gleason 7-10 Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-naive Men. Eur Urol Oncol, 2019. 2: 311.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31200846
382.Hansen, N.L., et al. The influence of prostate-specific antigen density on positive and negative predictive values of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer in a repeat biopsy setting. BJU Int, 2017. 119: 724.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27488931
383.Oishi, M., et al. Which Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Can Safely Avoid Biopsy for Prostate Cancer? J Urol, 2019. 201: 268.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30189186
384.Rajendran, I., et al. Risk stratification of prostate cancer with MRI and prostate-specific antigen density-based tool for personalized decision making. Br J Radiol, 2024. 97: 113.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38263825
385.Sigle, A., et al. Prediction of Significant Prostate Cancer in Equivocal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesions: A High-volume International Multicenter Study. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 606.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36804191
386.Kortenbach, K.C., et al. Early experience in avoiding biopsies for biopsy-naive men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer but non-suspicious biparametric magnetic resonance imaging results and prostate-specific antigen density < 0.15 ng/mL(2): A 2-year follow-up study. Acta Radiol Open, 2022. 11: 20584601221094825.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35464293
387.Konishi, T., et al. Combination of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging with prostate-specific antigen density to stratify the risk of significant prostate cancer: Initial biopsy and long-term follow-up results. Int J Urol, 2022. 29: 1031.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35697503
388.Schoots, I.G., et al. Multivariate risk prediction tools including MRI for individualized biopsy decision in prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions. World J Urol, 2020. 38: 517.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30868240
389.Saba, K., et al. External Validation and Comparison of Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators Incorporating Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prediction of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2020. 203: 719.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31651228
390.Radtke, J.P., et al. Prediction of significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men: Validation of a novel risk model combining MRI and clinical parameters and comparison to an ERSPC risk calculator and PI-RADS. PLoS One, 2019. 14: e0221350.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31450235
391.Pallauf, M., et al. External validation of two mpMRI-risk calculators predicting risk of prostate cancer before biopsy. World J Urol, 2022. 40: 2451.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35941246
392.Peters, M., et al. Predicting the Need for Biopsy to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-detected Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert >/=3 Lesion: Development and Multinational External Validation of the Imperial Rapid Access to Prostate Imaging and Diagnosis Risk Score. Eur Urol, 2022. 82: 559.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35963650
393.Diamand, R., et al. External validation and comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-based risk prediction models for prostate biopsy stratification. World J Urol, 2024. 42: 372.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38866949
394.Schoots, I.G., et al. MRI in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Review and Recommendations, From the AJR Special Series on Screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2025. 225: e2432588.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39969143
395.Schoots, I.G., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Biopsy Strategies in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2025. 88: 247.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40514255
396.Hugosson, J., et al. Prostate Cancer Screening with PSA and MRI Followed by Targeted Biopsy Only. N Engl J Med, 2022. 387: 2126.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36477032
397.Eklund, M., et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy in Prostate Cancer Screening. N Engl J Med, 2021. 385: 908.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34237810
398.Bratt, O., et al. Population-based Organised Prostate Cancer Testing: Results from the First Invitation of 50-year-old Men. Eur Urol, 2024. 85: 207.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38042646
399.Nam, R., et al. Prostate MRI versus PSA screening for prostate cancer detection (the MVP Study): a randomised clinical trial. BMJ Open, 2022. 12: e059482.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36351725
400.Moore, C.M., et al. Prevalence of MRI lesions in men responding to a GP-led invitation for a prostate health check: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Oncol, 2023. 2: e000057.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39886504
401.Eldred-Evans, D., et al. Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening With Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Ultrasonography: The IP1-PROSTAGRAM Study. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 395.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33570542
402.Wetterauer, C., et al. Opportunistic Prostate Cancer Screening with Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (VISIONING). Eur Urol Focus, 2024. 10: 332.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38402105
403.Messina, E., et al. Design of a magnetic resonance imaging-based screening program for early diagnosis of prostate cancer: preliminary results of a randomized controlled trial-Prostate Cancer Secondary Screening in Sapienza (PROSA). Eur Radiol, 2024. 34: 204.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37561183
404.Eldred-Evans, D., et al. An Evaluation of Screening Pathways Using a Combination of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-specific Antigen: Results from the IP1-PROSTAGRAM Study. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 295.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37080821
405.Nam, R.K., et al. A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Screening in the General Population. J Urol, 2016. 196: 361.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26880413
406.Eichler, K., et al. Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: a systematic review. J Urol, 2006. 175: 1605.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16600713
407.Watts, K.L., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cognitive vs. image-guided fusion prostate biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol, 2020. 38: 734 e19.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32321689
408.Wegelin, O., et al. The FUTURE Trial: A Multicenter Randomised Controlled Trial on Target Biopsy Techniques Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prior Negative Biopsies. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 582.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30522912
409.Wegelin, O., et al. Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique? Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 517.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27568655
410.Klotz, L., et al. Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy With Systematic Transrectal Ultrasonography Biopsy for Biopsy-Naive Men at Risk for Prostate Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 534.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33538782
411.Goldberg, H., et al. Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Informed Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy Naive Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2020. 203: 1085.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31609177
412.Wei, C., et al. Multicenter Randomized Trial Assessing MRI and Image-guided Biopsy for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The MULTIPROS Study. Radiology, 2023. 308: e221428.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37489992
413.Exterkate, L., et al. Is There Still a Need for Repeated Systematic Biopsies in Patients with Previous Negative Biopsies in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies of the Prostate? Eur Urol Oncol, 2020. 3: 216.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31239236
414.Leow, J.J., et al. Can we omit systematic biopsies in patients undergoing MRI fusion-targeted prostate biopsies? Asian J Androl, 2023. 25: 43.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35488666
415.Deniffel, D., et al. Prostate biopsy in the era of MRI-targeting: towards a judicious use of additional systematic biopsy. Eur Radiol, 2022. 32: 7544.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35507051
416.Zattoni, F., et al. Enhancing Prostate Cancer Detection Accuracy in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy: Optimizing the Number of Cores Taken. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2024. 66: 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39027654
417.Bryk, D.J., et al. The Role of Ipsilateral and Contralateral Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men With Unilateral Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesion Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy. Urology, 2017. 102: 178.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27871829
418.Freifeld, Y., et al. Optimal sampling scheme in men with abnormal multiparametric MRI undergoing MRI-TRUS fusion prostate biopsy. Urol Oncol, 2019. 37: 57.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30446460
419.Jager, A., et al. An optimized prostate biopsy strategy in patients with a unilateral lesion on prostate magnetic resonance imaging avoids unnecessary biopsies. Ther Adv Urol, 2022. 14: 17562872221111410.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35924207
420.Ruan, M., et al. Novel sampling scheme with reduced cores in men with multiparametric MRI-visible lesions undergoing prostate biopsy. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2023. 48: 2139.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37036488
421.Zambon, A., et al. Which protocol for prostate biopsies in patients with a positive MRI? Interest of systematic biopsies by sectors. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024. 27: 500.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38114598
422.Brisbane, W.G., et al. Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Umbra, Penumbra, and Value of Perilesional Sampling. Eur Urol, 2022. 82: 303.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35115177
423.Noujeim, J.P., et al. Optimizing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: the role of perilesional sampling. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 575.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36509930
424.Hagens, M.J., et al. An Magnetic Resonance Imaging-directed Targeted-plus-perilesional Biopsy Approach for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: "Less Is More". Eur Urol Open Sci, 2022. 43: 68.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36353069
425.Hagens, M.J., et al. Diagnostic Performance of a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-directed Targeted plus Regional Biopsy Approach in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2022. 40: 95.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35540708
426.Sanguedolce, F., et al. Regional Versus Systematic Biopsy in Addition to Targeted Biopsy: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2025. 8: 534
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39455339
427.de Rooij, M., et al. ESUR/ESUI consensus statements on multi-parametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: quality requirements for image acquisition, interpretation and radiologists' training. Eur Radiol, 2020. 30: 5404.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32424596
428.Meng, X., et al. The Institutional Learning Curve of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Temporal Improvements in Cancer Detection in 4 Years. J Urol, 2018. 200: 1022.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29886090
429.Stabile, A., et al. Assessing the Clinical Value of Positive Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Young Men with a Suspicion of Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 594.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31204312
430.Dell'Oglio, P., et al. Impact of multiparametric MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy on pre-therapeutic risk assessment in prostate cancer patients candidate for radical prostatectomy. World J Urol, 2019. 37: 221.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29948044
431.Faiena, I., et al. PI-RADS Version 2 Category on 3 Tesla Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predicts Oncologic Outcomes in Gleason 3 + 4 Prostate Cancer on Biopsy. J Urol, 2019. 201: 91.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30142318
432.Gaffney, C.D., et al. The oncologic risk of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic cores in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Cancer, 2023. 129: 3790.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37584213
433.Scuderi, S., et al. The Highest Grade Group Does Not Drive the Risk of Recurrence when Systematic and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-targeted Biopsies are Discordant: Preliminary Findings Using Radical Prostatectomy Pathology as a Surrogate for MRI-targeted Biopsy Grade. Eur Urol Focus, 2024. 10: 486.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37739916
434.Hsieh, P.-F., et al. Saturation target biopsy can overcome the learning curve of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy of the prostate. Journal of Men's Health, 2022. 18: 1.
https://www.jomh.org/articles/10.31083/j.jomh1806127
435.Kanagarajah, A., et al. A systematic review on the outcomes of local anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy. BJU Int, 2023. 131: 408.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36177521
436.Pradere, B., et al. Nonantibiotic Strategies for the Prevention of Infectious Complications following Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2021. 205: 653.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33026903
437.Tu, X., et al. Transperineal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy May Perform Better Than Transrectal Route in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2019. 17: e860.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31281065
438.Hu, J.C., et al. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial. Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 61.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38212178
439.Mian, B.M., et al. Complications Following Transrectal and Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Results of the ProBE-PC Randomized Clinical Trial. J Urol, 2024. 211: 205.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37976319
440.Ploussard, G., et al. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Final Results of the Randomized PERFECT trial (CCAFU-PR1). Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 1080.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38403523
441.Zattoni, F., et al. Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 1303.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39095298
442.Bryant, R.J., et al. Local anaesthetic transperineal biopsy versus transrectal prostate biopsy in prostate cancer detection (TRANSLATE): a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol, 2025. 26: 583.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40139210
443.von Knobloch, R., et al. Bilateral fine-needle administered local anaesthetic nerve block for pain control during TRUS-guided multi-core prostate biopsy: a prospective randomised trial. Eur Urol, 2002. 41: 508.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12074792
444.Adamakis, I., et al. Pain during transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy: a randomized prospective trial comparing periprostatic infiltration with lidocaine with the intrarectal instillation of lidocaine-prilocain cream. World J Urol, 2004. 22: 281.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14689224
445.Bass, E.J., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging targeted transperineal prostate biopsy: a local anaesthetic approach. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2017. 20: 311.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28485391
446.Xiang, J., et al. Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol, 2019. 17: 31.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30760274
447.Iremashvili, V.V., et al. Periprostatic local anesthesia with pudendal block for transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a randomized trial. Urology, 2010. 75: 1023.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20080288
448.He, B.M., et al. Perineal nerve block versus periprostatic block for patients undergoing transperineal prostate biopsy (APROPOS): a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled study. EClinicalMedicine, 2023. 58: 101919.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37007736
449.Meyer, A.R., et al. Initial Experience Performing In-office Ultrasound-guided Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Under Local Anesthesia Using the PrecisionPoint Transperineal Access System. Urology, 2018. 115: 8.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29409845
450.Lam, W., Wong, A., Chun, S., Wong, T., et al. Prostate cancer detection, tolerability and safety of transperineal prostate biopsy under local-anaesthesia vs standard transrectal biopsy in biopsy-naive men: a pragmatic, parallel group, randomized controlled study. BJU Int, 2022. 129: 9.
https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bju.15675
451.Farooq, K., et al. Role of Povidone-Iodine-Soaked Gauze in Preventing Infectious Complications Following Trans Rectal Digital Guided Prostate Biopsy. Journal of Postgraduate Medical Institute, 2021. 35: 225.
https://jpmi.org.pk/index.php/jpmi/article/view/2849
452.Bennett, H.Y., et al. The global burden of major infectious complications following prostate biopsy. Epidemiol Infect, 2016. 144: 1784.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26645476
453.Berry, B., et al. Comparison of complications after transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy: a national population-based study. BJU Int, 2020. 126: 97.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32124525
454.Castellani, D., et al. Infection Rate after Transperineal Prostate Biopsy with and without Prophylactic Antibiotics: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies. J Urol, 2022. 207: 25.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34555932
455.Basourakos, S.P., et al. Role of Prophylactic Antibiotics in Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2022. 37: 53.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35243391
456.Chernysheva, D.Y., Popov S.V., Orlov I.N., Tsoy A.V., Neradovskiy V.A. . The first experience of transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis. Cancer Urology 2021. Cancer Urology: 46.
https://oncourology.abvpress.ru/oncur/article/view/1392
457.Jacewicz, M., et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis versus no antibiotic prophylaxis in transperineal prostate biopsies (NORAPP): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis, 2022. 22: 1465.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35839791
458.Wolff, I., et al. Infectious complications following transperineal prostate biopsy with or without periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis-a systematic review including meta-analysis of all comparative studies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39741175
459.Ding, X.F., et al. Risk factors for infection complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided transperineal prostate biopsy. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 2463.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32949254
460.Shaker, H.S., et al. Does The Use Of Povidone Iodine Suppository Decrease The Infective Complications Of TRUS Guided Prostate Biopsies? A Randomized Prospective Study. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, 2020. 113.
https://academic.oup.com/qjmed/article-abstract/113/Supplement_1/hcaa070.024/5829649?redirectedFrom=fulltext
461.Yu, L., et al. [Impact of insertion timing of iodophor cotton ball on the control of infection complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2014. 94: 609.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24762693
462.Pilatz, A., et al. Antibiotic Prophylaxis for the Prevention of Infectious Complications following Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2020. 204: 224.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32105195
463.European Medicines Agency. Disabling and potentially permanent side effects lead to suspension or restrictions of quinolone and fluoroquinolone antibiotics. 2019. 2021 p. EMA/175398/2019.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/referrals/quinolone-fluoroquinolone-containing-medicinal-products
464.Carignan, A., et al. Effectiveness of fosfomycin tromethamine prophylaxis in preventing infection following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy: Results from a large Canadian cohort. J Glob Antimicrob Resist, 2019. 17: 112.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30553114
465.Wegelin, O., et al. Complications and Adverse Events of Three Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Target Biopsy Techniques in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer Among Men with Prior Negative Biopsies: Results from the FUTURE Trial, a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2019. 2: 617.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31519516
466.Borghesi, M., et al. Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 353.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27543165
467.Giannarini, G., et al. Continuing or discontinuing low-dose aspirin before transrectal prostate biopsy: results of a prospective randomized trial. Urology, 2007. 70: 501.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17688919
468.Garcia, C., et al. Does transperineal prostate biopsy reduce complications compared with transrectal biopsy? a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. 2016. 195:4 SUPPL. 1 p. e328.
https://www.auajournals.org/doi/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.2879
469.Xue, J., et al. Comparison between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy for detection of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Oncotarget, 2017. 8: 23322.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28177897
470.Padhani, A.R., et al. PI-RADS Steering Committee: The PI-RADS Multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed Biopsy Pathway. Radiology, 2019. 292: 464.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31184561
471.Stranne, J., et al. Systematic Biopsies as a Complement to Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies: "To Be or Not To Be"? Eur Urol, 2023. 83: 381.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36737297
472.Schoots, I.G., et al. Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-directed Biopsy Strategies for Changing the Paradigm of Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2020. 3: 32.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31706946
473.Bittencourt, L.K., et al. Risk-based MRI-directed diagnostic pathway outperforms non-risk-based pathways in suspected prostate cancer biopsy-naive men: a large cohort validation study. Eur Radiol, 2022. 32: 2330.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35028750
474.Stroomberg, H.V., et al. Standardized prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates following initial non-malignant biopsy result. BJU Int, 2023. 132: 181.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36847603
475.Grivas, N., et al. Prostate Cancer Detection Percentages of Repeat Biopsy in Patients with Positive Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert 3-5) and Negative Initial Biopsy. A Mini Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2022. 82: 452.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35985901
476.Ericson, K.J., et al. Prostate cancer detection following diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Can J Urol, 2017. 24: 8714.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28436357
477.Wiener, S., et al. Incidence of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer After a Diagnosis of Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation, High-grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia, or Benign Tissue. Urology, 2017. 110: 161.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28888752
478.Walz, J., et al. High incidence of prostate cancer detected by saturation biopsy after previous negative biopsy series. Eur Urol, 2006. 50: 498.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16631303
479.Moran, B.J., et al. Re-biopsy of the prostate using a stereotactic transperineal technique. J Urol, 2006. 176: 1376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16952636
480.Panebianco, V., et al. Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer: What's Next? Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 48.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29566957
481.Linzer, D.G., et al. Seminal vesicle biopsy: accuracy and implications for staging of prostate cancer. Urology, 1996. 48: 757.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8911521
482.Pelzer, A.E., et al. Are transition zone biopsies still necessary to improve prostate cancer detection? Results from the tyrol screening project. Eur Urol, 2005. 48: 916.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16126324
483.Paner, G.P., et al. Updates in the Eighth Edition of the Tumor-Node-Metastasis Staging Classification for Urologic Cancers. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 560.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29325693
484.Expert Panel on Urologic, I., et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria((R)) Prostate Cancer-Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging. J Am Coll Radiol, 2017. 14: S245.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28473080
485.de Rooij, M., et al. Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 233.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26215604
486.Chandrasekar, T., et al. Multiparametric MRI is not sufficient for prostate cancer staging: A single institutional experience validated by a multi-institutional regional collaborative. Urol Oncol, 2023. 41: 355 e1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37357123
487.Merriman, K.M., et al. Comparison of MRI-Based Staging and Pathologic Staging for Predicting Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2023. 221: 773.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37404084
488.Huang, M.M., et al. Prostate magnetic resonance imaging to predict grade concordance, extra prostatic extension, and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol, 2025. 43: 445 e11.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40082107
489.Futterer, J.J., et al. Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology, 2005. 237: 541.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16244263
490.Kim, T.H., et al. The Diagnostic Performance of the Length of Tumor Capsular Contact on MRI for Detecting Prostate Cancer Extraprostatic Extension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Korean J Radiol, 2020. 21: 684.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32410407
491.Valentin, B., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging improves the prediction of tumor staging in localized prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2021. 46: 2751.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33452898
492.Gatti, M., et al. mEPE-score: a comprehensive grading system for predicting pathologic extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer at multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol, 2022. 32: 4942.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35290508
493.Park, K.J., et al. Extraprostatic Tumor Extension: Comparison of Preoperative Multiparametric MRI Criteria and Histopathologic Correlation after Radical Prostatectomy. Radiology, 2020. 296: 87.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32368959
494.Morlacco, A., et al. Nomograms in Urologic Oncology: Lights and Shadows. J Clin Med, 2021. 10.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33801184
495.Diamand, R., et al. External Validation of Models for Prediction of Side-specific Extracapsular Extension in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 309.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36153227
496.Alves, J.R., et al. Independent external validation of nomogram to predict extracapsular extension in patients with prostate cancer. Eur Radiol, 2020. 30: 5004.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32307562
497.Zaurito, P., et al. The prognostic role of prostate MRI in prostate cancer patients. Curr Opin Urol, 2025. 35: 418.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40269557
498.Soeterik, T.F.W., et al. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Should Be Preferred Over Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Local Staging and Disease Risk Classification. Urology, 2021. 147: 205.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33129868
499.Abuzallouf, S., et al. Baseline staging of newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a summary of the literature. J Urol, 2004. 171: 2122.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15126770
500.Kiss, B., et al. Current Status of Lymph Node Imaging in Bladder and Prostate Cancer. Urology, 2016. 96: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26966038
501.Lebastchi, A.H., et al. Comparison of cross-sectional imaging techniques for the detection of prostate cancer lymph node metastasis: a critical review. Transl Androl Urol, 2020. 9: 1415.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32676426
502.Tohi, Y., et al. Overuse of imaging in prostate cancer staging. Int J Urol, 2025. 32: 533.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39900439
503.Draulans, C., et al. Development and External Validation of a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and International Society of Urological Pathology Based Add-On Prediction Tool to Identify Prostate Cancer Candidates for Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection. J Urol, 2020. 203: 713.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31718396
504.Gandaglia, G., et al. External Validation of the 2019 Briganti Nomogram for the Identification of Prostate Cancer Patients Who Should Be Considered for an Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 138.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32268944
505.Di Pierro, G.B., et al. Comparison of Four Validated Nomograms (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Briganti 2012, 2017, and 2019) Predicting Lymph Node Invasion in Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer Candidates for Radical Prostatectomy and Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: Clinical Experience and Review of the Literature. Cancers (Basel), 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36980571
506.Lodeta, B., et al. Benefit and harm of lymphadenectomy in intermediate risk prostate cancer: comparison of five nomograms. BMC Urol, 2023. 23: 190.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37980520
507.Gandaglia, G., et al. Identification of the Optimal Candidates for Nodal Staging with Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Among Prostate Cancer Patients Who Underwent Preoperative Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography. External Validation of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Briganti Nomograms and Development of a Novel Tool. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 543.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37270378
508.Maurer, T., et al. Current use of PSMA-PET in prostate cancer management. Nat Rev Urol, 2016. 13: 226.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26902337
509.Werner, R.A., et al. (18)F-Labeled, PSMA-Targeted Radiotracers: Leveraging the Advantages of Radiofluorination for Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging. Theranostics, 2020. 10: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31903102
510.Hope, T.A., et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET for Pelvic Nodal Metastasis Detection Prior to Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Multicenter Prospective Phase 3 Imaging Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 1635.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34529005
511.van Kalmthout, L.W.M., et al. Prospective Validation of Gallium-68 Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography for Primary Staging of Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2020. 203: 537.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31487220
512.Jansen, B.H.E., et al. Pelvic lymph-node staging with (18)F-DCFPyL PET/CT prior to extended pelvic lymph-node dissection in primary prostate cancer - the SALT trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2021. 48: 509.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32789599
513.Pienta, K.J., et al. A Phase 2/3 Prospective Multicenter Study of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen PET/CT with (18)F-DCFPyL in Prostate Cancer Patients (OSPREY). J Urol, 2021. 206: 52.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33634707
514.Perera, M., et al. Gallium-68 Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Advanced Prostate Cancer-Updated Diagnostic Utility, Sensitivity, Specificity, and Distribution of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-avid Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 403.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30773328
515.Wu, H., et al. Diagnostic Performance of (68)Gallium Labelled Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Staging the Prostate Cancer with Intermediate or High Risk Prior to Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. World J Mens Health, 2020. 38: 208.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31081294
516.Van Damme, J., et al. Comparison of (68)Ga-Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography (PET-CT) and Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging (WB-MRI) with Diffusion Sequences (DWI) in the Staging of Advanced Prostate Cancer. Cancers (Basel), 2021. 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34771449
517.Meijer, D., et al. External Validation and Addition of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography to the Most Frequently Used Nomograms for the Prediction of Pelvic Lymph-node Metastases: an International Multicenter Study. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 234.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34024652
518.Vis, A.N., et al. Development and External Validation of a Novel Nomogram to Predict the Probability of Pelvic Lymph-node Metastases in Prostate Cancer Patients Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Molecular Imaging with Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 553.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37045707
519.Gandaglia, G., et al. External Validation of Nomograms for the Identification of Pelvic Nodal Dissection Candidates Among Prostate Cancer Patients with Negative Preoperative Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography. Eur Urol Oncol, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39890547
520.Hinojosa-Gonzalez, D.E., et al. Oncologic Outcome of the Extent of Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection During Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Network Analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2024. 10: 234.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38242825
521.Fossati, N., et al. The Benefits and Harms of Different Extents of Lymph Node Dissection During Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2017. 72: 84.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28126351
522.Ding, G., et al. A comparative analysis of perioperative complications and biochemical recurrence between standard and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg, 2024. 110: 1735.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38052016
523.Touijer, K.A., et al. Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Prostate Cancer: Update from a Randomized Clinical Trial of Limited Versus Extended Dissection. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 253.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39472200
524.Lestingi, J.F.P., et al. Extended Versus Limited Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection During Radical Prostatectomy for Intermediate- and High-risk Prostate Cancer: Early Oncological Outcomes from a Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Eur Urol, 2021. 79: 595.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33293077
525.Farolfi, A., et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 Positron Emission Tomography Detects Residual Prostate Cancer after Prostatectomy in a Multicenter Retrospective Study. J Urol, 2019. 202: 1174.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31233369
526.Cacciamani, G.E., et al. Impact of Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection and Its Extent on Perioperative Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 134.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33745687
527.May, M., et al. Impact of Peritoneal Interposition Flap on Patients Undergoing Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Eur Urol Focus, 2024. 10: 80.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37541915
528.Touijer, K.A., et al. Limited versus Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Prostate Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 532.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33865797
529.Pose, R.M., et al. Impact of peritoneal bladder flap in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients on lymphoceles: a prospective randomised trial. World J Urol, 2025. 43: 148.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40044802
530.Clark, T., et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol, 2003. 169: 145.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12478123
531.Wani, M., et al. Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) in Post-Prostatectomy Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med, 2023. 12.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37373673
532.Carlsson, S., et al. Lymph swelling after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int, 2022. 129: 695.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35132753
533.Clinckaert, A., et al. The Prevalence of Lower Limb and Genital Lymphedema after Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review. Cancers (Basel), 2022. 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36428759
534.Engel, J., et al. Survival benefit of radical prostatectomy in lymph node-positive patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2010. 57: 754.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20106588
535.van der Poel, H.G., et al. Sentinel node biopsy for prostate cancer: report from a consensus panel meeting. BJU Int, 2017. 120: 204.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28188689
536.Harke, N.N., et al. Fluorescence-supported lymphography and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective, randomized trial. World J Urol, 2018. 36: 1817.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29767326
537.Wit, E.M.K., et al. Sentinel Node Procedure in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review to Assess Diagnostic Accuracy. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 596.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27639533
538.Chou, Y.J., et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Indocyanine Green-stained Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2025. 74: 34.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40066190
539.de Pablos-Rodriguez, P., et al. Personalised indocyanine-guided lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer: a randomised clinical trial. BJU Int, 2023. 132: 591.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37410659
540.Berrens, A.C., et al. State of the Art in Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-targeted Surgery-A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2023. 54: 43.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37361200
541.Shen, G., et al. Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol, 2014. 43: 1503.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24841276
542.Briganti, A., et al. When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of the currently available guidelines and proposal of a novel risk stratification tool. Eur Urol, 2010. 57: 551.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20034730
543.Lin, Y., et al. When to perform bone scintigraphy in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer? a retrospective study. BMC Urol, 2017. 17: 41.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28606069
544.O'Sullivan, J.M., et al. Broadening the criteria for avoiding staging bone scans in prostate cancer: a retrospective study of patients at the Royal Marsden Hospital. BJU Int, 2003. 92: 685.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14616446
545.Ayyathurai, R., et al. A study on staging bone scans in newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Urol Int, 2006. 76: 209.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16601380
546.Mohseninia, N., et al. Bone Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: Bone Scan Versus PET Imaging. Semin Nucl Med, 2024. 54: 97.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37596138
547.Benard, F., et al. Intra-individual comparison of (18)F-sodium fluoride PET-CT and (99m)Tc bone scintigraphy with SPECT in patients with prostate cancer or breast cancer at high risk for skeletal metastases (MITNEC-A1): a multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2022. 23: 1499.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36343655
548.Tateishi, U., et al. A meta-analysis of (18)F-Fluoride positron emission tomography for assessment of metastatic bone tumor. Ann Nucl Med, 2010. 24: 523.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20559896
549.Evangelista, L., et al. Diagnostic imaging to detect and evaluate response to therapy in bone metastases from prostate cancer: current modalities and new horizons. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2016. 43: 1546.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26956538
550.Zacho, H.D., et al. No Added Value of (18)F-Sodium Fluoride PET/CT for the Detection of Bone Metastases in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer with Normal Bone Scintigraphy. J Nucl Med, 2019. 60: 1713.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31147402
551.Van Nieuwenhove, S., et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer assessment: Current status and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2022. 55: 653.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33382151
552.Corfield, J., et al. (68)Ga-prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) for primary staging of high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review. World J Urol, 2018. 36: 519.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29344682
553.Hofman, M.S., et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet, 2020. 395: 1208.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32209449
554.Anttinen, M., et al. A Prospective Comparison of (18)F-prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-1007 Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography, Whole-body 1.5 T Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Diffusion-weighted Imaging, and Single-photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography with Traditional Imaging in Primary Distant Metastasis Staging of Prostate Cancer (PROSTAGE). Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 635.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32675047
555.Djaileb, L., et al. Presurgical (68)Ga-PSMA-11 Positron Emission Tomography for Biochemical Recurrence Risk Assessment: A Follow-up Analysis of a Multicenter Prospective Phase 3 Imaging Trial. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 588.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37482512
556.Hicks, R.J., et al. Seduction by Sensitivity: Reality, Illusion, or Delusion? The Challenge of Assessing Outcomes after PSMA Imaging Selection of Patients for Treatment. J Nucl Med, 2017. 58: 1969.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28935839
557.Smith, B.D., et al. Future of cancer incidence in the United States: burdens upon an aging, changing nation. J Clin Oncol, 2009. 27: 2758.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19403886
558.Arnold, M., et al. Recent trends in incidence of five common cancers in 26 European countries since 1988: Analysis of the European Cancer Observatory. Eur J Cancer, 2015. 51: 1164.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24120180
559.Liu, D., et al. Active surveillance versus surgery for low risk prostate cancer: a clinical decision analysis. J Urol, 2012. 187: 1241.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22335873
560.Bill-Axelson, A., et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2014. 370: 932.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24597866
561.Kupelian, P.A., et al. Comparison of the efficacy of local therapies for localized prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen era: a large single-institution experience with radical prostatectomy and external-beam radiotherapy. J Clin Oncol, 2002. 20: 3376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12177097
562.Bubolz, T., et al. Treatments for prostate cancer in older men: 1984-1997. Urology, 2001. 58: 977.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11744472
563.Houterman, S., et al. Impact of comorbidity on treatment and prognosis of prostate cancer patients: a population-based study. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2006. 58: 60.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16213153
564.Ries LAG, M.D., Krapcho M et al. eds. . SEER cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2005. 2008. 2022.
http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2011/
565.Scosyrev, E., et al. Prostate cancer in the elderly: frequency of advanced disease at presentation and disease-specific mortality. Cancer, 2012. 118: 3062.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22006014
566.Richstone, L., et al. Radical prostatectomy in men aged >or=70 years: effect of age on upgrading, upstaging, and the accuracy of a preoperative nomogram. BJU Int, 2008. 101: 541.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18257855
567.Sun, L., et al. Men older than 70 years have higher risk prostate cancer and poorer survival in the early and late prostate specific antigen eras. J Urol, 2009. 182: 2242.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19758616
568.Hamilton, A.S., et al. Trends in the treatment of localized prostate cancer using supplemented cancer registry data. BJU Int, 2011. 107: 576.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20735387
569.Studenski, S., et al. Gait speed and survival in older adults. JAMA, 2011. 305: 50.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21205966
570.Ethun, C.G., et al. Frailty and cancer: Implications for oncology surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. CA Cancer J Clin, 2017. 67: 362.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28731537
571.Bellera, C.A., et al. Screening older cancer patients: first evaluation of the G-8 geriatric screening tool. Ann Oncol, 2012. 23: 2166.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22250183
572.Hamaker, M.E., et al. The effect of a geriatric evaluation on treatment decisions and outcome for older cancer patients - A systematic review. J Geriatr Oncol, 2018. 9: 430.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29631898
573.Rockwood, K., et al. Using the Clinical Frailty Scale in Allocating Scarce Health Care Resources. Can Geriatr J, 2020. 23: 210.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32904824
574.McIsaac, D.I., et al. Frailty as a Predictor of Death or New Disability After Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study. Ann Surg, 2020. 271: 283.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30048320
575.van Walree, I.C., et al. Clinical judgment versus geriatric assessment for frailty in older patients with cancer. J Geriatr Oncol, 2020. 11: 1138.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32576520
576.Albertsen, P.C., et al. Impact of comorbidity on survival among men with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2011. 29: 1335.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21357791
577.Tewari, A., et al. Long-term survival probability in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: a case-control, propensity modeling study stratified by race, age, treatment and comorbidities. J Urol, 2004. 171: 1513.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15017210
578.Parmelee, P.A., et al. Validation of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale in a geriatric residential population. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1995. 43: 130.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7836636
579.Groome, P.A., et al. Assessing the impact of comorbid illnesses on death within 10 years in prostate cancer treatment candidates. Cancer, 2011. 117: 3943.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21858801
580.Charlson, M.E., et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis, 1987. 40: 373.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3558716
581.Blanc-Bisson, C., et al. Undernutrition in elderly patients with cancer: target for diagnosis and intervention. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2008. 67: 243.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18554922
582.Sachs, G.A., et al. Cognitive impairment: an independent predictor of excess mortality: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med, 2011. 155: 300.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21893623
583.Robinson, T.N., et al. Preoperative cognitive dysfunction is related to adverse postoperative outcomes in the elderly. J Am Coll Surg, 2012. 215: 12.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22626912
584.Borson, S., et al. The Mini-Cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2003. 51: 1451.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14511167
585.Korc-Grodzicki, B., et al. Prevention of post-operative delirium in older patients with cancer undergoing surgery. J Geriatr Oncol, 2015. 6: 60.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25454768
586.Oken, M.M., et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol, 1982. 5: 649.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7165009
587.Katz, S., et al. Studies of Illness in the Aged. The Index of Adl: A Standardized Measure of Biological and Psychosocial Function. JAMA, 1963. 185: 914.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14044222
588.Lawton, M.P., et al. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist, 1969. 9: 179.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5349366
589.Stineman, M.G., et al. All-cause 1-, 5-, and 10-year mortality in elderly people according to activities of daily living stage. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2012. 60: 485.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22352414
590.Paladino, J., et al. Communication Strategies for Sharing Prognostic Information With Patients: Beyond Survival Statistics. JAMA, 2019. 322: 1345.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31415085
591.Rostoft, S., et al. Shared decision-making in older patients with cancer - What does the patient want? J Geriatr Oncol, 2021. 12: 339.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32839118
592.Soubeyran, P., et al. Screening for vulnerability in older cancer patients: the ONCODAGE Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study. PLoS One, 2014. 9: e115060.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25503576
593.Hamdy, F.C., et al. Fifteen-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2023. 388: 1547.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36912538
594.Timilshina, N., et al. Long-term Outcomes Following Active Surveillance of Low-grade Prostate Cancer: A Population-based Study Using a Landmark Approach. J Urol, 2023. 209: 540.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36475730
595.Ventimiglia, E., et al. Long-term Outcomes Among Men Undergoing Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer in Sweden. JAMA Netw Open, 2022. 5: e2231015.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36103180
596.IARC. IARC France All Cancers (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) Estimated Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012. 2014.
http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx.
597.Klotz, L. Overdiagnosis in urologic cancer : For World Journal of Urology Symposium on active surveillance in prostate and renal cancer. World J Urol, 2022. 40: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33492425
598.Johansson, J.E., et al. Natural history of localised prostatic cancer. A population-based study in 223 untreated patients. Lancet, 1989. 1: 799.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2564901
599.Jonsson, E., et al. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate in Iceland: a population-based study of stage, Gleason grade, treatment and long-term survival in males diagnosed between 1983 and 1987. Scand J Urol Nephrol, 2006. 40: 265.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16916765
600.Lu-Yao, G.L., et al. Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management. JAMA, 2009. 302: 1202.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19755699
601.Adolfsson, J., et al. The 20-Yr outcome in patients with well- or moderately differentiated clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed in the pre-PSA era: the prognostic value of tumour ploidy and comorbidity. Eur Urol, 2007. 52: 1028.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17467883
602.Parker, C.C., et al. Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet, 2020. 396: 1413.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002429
603.Thurtle, D.R., et al. Individual prognosis at diagnosis in nonmetastatic prostate cancer: Development and external validation of the PREDICT Prostate multivariable model. PLoS Med, 2019. 16: e1002758.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30860997
604.Heidenreich, A. Identification of high-risk prostate cancer: role of prostate-specific antigen, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity. Eur Urol, 2008. 54: 976.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18640768
605.Thomsen, F.B., et al. Survival benefit of early androgen receptor inhibitor therapy in locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term follow-up of the SPCG-6 study. Eur J Cancer, 2015. 51: 1283.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25892647
606.Ventimiglia, E., et al. Natural History of Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Managed With Watchful Waiting. JAMA Netw Open, 2024. 7: e2414599.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38833251
607.Bill-Axelson, A., et al. Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Prostate Cancer - 29-Year Follow-up. N Engl J Med, 2018. 379: 2319.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30575473
608.Wilt, T.J., et al. Radical Prostatectomy or Observation for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: Extended Follow-up of the Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT). Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 713.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32089359
609.Steineck, G., et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting. N Engl J Med, 2002. 347: 790.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12226149
610.Vernooij, R.W., et al. Radical prostatectomy versus deferred treatment for localised prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2020. 6: CD006590.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32495338
611.Graversen, P.H., et al. Radical prostatectomy versus expectant primary treatment in stages I and II prostatic cancer. A fifteen-year follow-up. Urology, 1990. 36: 493.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2247914
612.Hamdy, F.C., et al. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2016. 375: 1415.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27626136
613.Thomsen, F.B., et al. Active surveillance for clinically localized prostate cancer--a systematic review. J Surg Oncol, 2014. 109: 830.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24610744
614.Bryant, R.J., et al. The ProtecT trial: analysis of the patient cohort, baseline risk stratification and disease progression. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 506.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31900963
615.Bruinsma, S.M., et al. Expert consensus document: Semantics in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer - results of a modified Delphi consensus procedure. Nat Rev Urol, 2017. 14: 312.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28290462
616.Tosoian, J.J., et al. Intermediate and Longer-Term Outcomes From a Prospective Active-Surveillance Program for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 3379.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26324359
617.Loeb, S., et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinicopathologic variables and biomarkers for risk stratification. Eur Urol, 2015. 67: 619.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25457014
618.Ha, Y.S., et al. Prostate-specific antigen density toward a better cutoff to identify better candidates for active surveillance. Urology, 2014. 84: 365.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24925834
619.Mazzone, P.J., et al. Evaluating the Patient With a Pulmonary Nodule: A Review. JAMA, 2022. 327: 264.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35040882
620.Moore, C.M., et al. Best Current Practice and Research Priorities in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer-A Report of a Movember International Consensus Meeting. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 160.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36710133
621.Petrelli, F., et al. Predictive Factors for Reclassification and Relapse in Prostate Cancer Eligible for Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Urology, 2016. 91: 136.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26896733
622.Newcomb, L.F., et al. Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Using Protocol-Directed Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. JAMA, 2024. 331: 2084.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38814624
623.Lam, T.B.L., et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel Consensus Statements for Deferred Treatment with Curative Intent for Localised Prostate Cancer from an International Collaborative Study (DETECTIVE Study). Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 790.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31587989
624.Willemse, P.M., et al. Systematic Review of Active Surveillance for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer to Develop Recommendations Regarding Inclusion of Intermediate-risk Disease, Biopsy Characteristics at Inclusion and Monitoring, and Surveillance Repeat Biopsy Strategy. Eur Urol, 2022. 81: 337.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34980492
625.Vigneswaran, H.T., et al. Progression on active surveillance for prostate cancer in Black men: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2022. 25: 165.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34239046
626.Jeon, J., et al. Impact of family history of prostate cancer on disease progression for prostatic cancer patients undergoing active surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Investig Clin Urol, 2024. 65: 315.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38978211
627.Marks, R.A., et al. The relationship between the extent of surgical margin positivity and prostate specific antigen recurrence in radical prostatectomy specimens. Hum Pathol, 2007. 38: 1207.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17490720
628.Moreira, D.M., et al. Baseline Perineural Invasion is Associated with Shorter Time to Progression in Men with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Active Surveillance: Results from the REDEEM Study. J Urol, 2015. 194: 1258.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25988518
629.Baboudjian, M., et al. Active Surveillance for Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Metaregression. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 617.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35934625
630.Mukherjee, S., et al. Comparison of Outcomes of Active Surveillance in Intermediate-Risk Versus Low-Risk Localised Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med, 2023. 12.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37048815
631.Enikeev, D., et al. Active Surveillance for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Current Protocols and Outcomes. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2020. 18: e739.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32768356
632.Morash, C., et al. Active surveillance for the management of localized prostate cancer: Guideline recommendations. Can Urol Assoc J, 2015. 9: 171.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26225165
633.Musunuru, H.B., et al. Active Surveillance for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Survival Outcomes in the Sunnybrook Experience. J Urol, 2016. 196: 1651.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27569437
634.Raldow, A.C., et al. Risk Group and Death From Prostate Cancer: Implications for Active Surveillance in Men With Favorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer. JAMA Oncol, 2015. 1: 334.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26181182
635.Tabriz, A.A., et al. Impact of Genomic Classifiers on Risk Stratification and Treatment Intensity in Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer : A Systematic Review. Ann Intern Med, 2025. 178: 218.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39832373
636.Chiam, K., et al. Use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: a scoping review on the benefits and harm of mpMRI in different biopsy scenarios. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 662.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33654249
637.Dieffenbacher, S., et al. Standardized Magnetic Resonance Imaging Reporting Using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria and Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion with Transperineal Saturation Biopsy to Select Men on Active Surveillance. Eur Urol Focus, 2021. 7: 102.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30878348
638.Dominique, G., et al. The utility of prostate MRI within active surveillance: description of the evidence. World J Urol, 2022. 40: 71.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34860274
639.Klotz, L., et al. Randomized Study of Systematic Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted and Systematic Biopsy in Men on Active Surveillance (ASIST): 2-year Postbiopsy Follow-up. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 311.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31708295
640.Schiavina, R., et al. The role of multiparametric MRI in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: The ROMAS randomized controlled trial. Urol Oncol, 2021. 39: 433 e1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33191117
641.Schoots, I.G., et al. Is magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy a useful addition to systematic confirmatory biopsy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2018. 122: 946.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29679430
642.Amin, A., et al. The Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Active Surveillance (MRIAS) Trial: Use of Baseline Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Saturation Biopsy to Reduce the Frequency of Surveillance Prostate Biopsies. J Urol, 2020. 203: 910.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31825297
643.Heetman, J.G., et al. Gallium-68 Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer Trial (PASPoRT). Eur Urol Oncol, 2023.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37296065
644.Ross, A.E., et al. Prostate-specific antigen kinetics during follow-up are an unreliable trigger for intervention in a prostate cancer surveillance program. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28: 2810.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20439642
645.Thomsen, F.B., et al. Association between PSA kinetics and cancer-specific mortality in patients with localised prostate cancer: analysis of the placebo arm of the SPCG-6 study. Ann Oncol, 2016. 27: 460.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26681677
646.Gnanapragasam, V.J., et al. The 5-year results of the Stratified Cancer Active Surveillance programme for men with prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2025. 135: 851.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39888260
647.Moore, C.M., et al. Reporting Magnetic Resonance 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.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27349615
648.Chu, C.E., et al. Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Serial Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 537.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33483265
649.Schoots, I.G., et al. Role of MRI in low-risk prostate cancer: finding the wolf in sheep's clothing or the sheep in wolf's clothing? Curr Opin Urol, 2017. 27: 238.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28306604
650.Hettiarachchi, D., et al. Can the Use of Serial Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging During Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer Avoid the Need for Prostate Biopsies?-A Systematic Diagnostic Test Accuracy Review. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 426.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32972894
651.Rajwa, P., et al. Reliability of Serial Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression During Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 549.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34020828
652.Yerram, N.K., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Detection of Grade Progression in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2021. 205: 1352.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33356479
653.Chu, C.E., et al. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Alone is Insufficient to Detect Grade Reclassification in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 515.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32631744
654.Fujihara, A., et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging facilitates reclassification during active surveillance for prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2021. 127: 712.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33043575
655.Stavrinides, V., et al. Mapping PSA density to outcome of MRI-based active surveillance for prostate cancer through joint longitudinal-survival models. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 1028.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33958731
656.Gallagher, K.M., et al. Four-year outcomes from a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme: PSA dynamics and serial MRI scans allow omission of protocol biopsies. BJU Int, 2019. 123: 429.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30113755
657.Olivier, J., et al. Low-risk prostate cancer selected for active surveillance with negative MRI at entry: can repeat biopsies at 1 year be avoided? A pilot study. World J Urol, 2019. 37: 253.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30039385
658.Bahri, R.A., et al. Does a Negative Prostate Biopsy Reduce the Risk of Prostate Cancer Reclassification in an Active Surveillance Protocol? An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Prostate, 2025. 85: 482.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39800984
659.Caglic, I., et al. MRI-derived PRECISE scores for predicting pathologically-confirmed radiological progression in prostate cancer patients on active surveillance. Eur Radiol, 2021. 31: 2696.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33196886
660.Deniffel, D., et al. Does the Visibility of Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer on Baseline Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Impact Clinical Outcomes? J Urol, 2020. 204: 1187.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32496160
661.Mamawala, M.K., et al. Utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the risk stratification of men with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer on active surveillance. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 861.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039537
662.Olivier, J., et al. Prostate Cancer Patients Under Active Surveillance with a Suspicious Magnetic Resonance Imaging Finding Are at Increased Risk of Needing Treatment: Results of the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) Consortium. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2022. 35: 59.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35024633
663.Rajwa, P., et al. Association of Negative Followup Biopsy and Reclassification during Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2021. 205: 1559.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33683937
664.Chu, C.E., et al. The Clinical Significance of Multiple Negative Surveillance Prostate Biopsies for Men on Active Surveillance-Does Cancer Vanish or Simply Hide? J Urol, 2021. 205: 109.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33198555
665.O'Connor, L.P., et al. Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression for Men on Active Surveillance. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 227.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33867045
666.Van Hemelrijck, M., et al. Reasons for Discontinuing Active Surveillance: Assessment of 21 Centres in 12 Countries in the Movember GAP3 Consortium. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 523.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30385049
667.Perera, M., et al. Outcomes of Grade Group 2 and 3 Prostate Cancer on Initial Versus Confirmatory Biopsy: Implications for Active Surveillance. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 662.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36566100
668.Liu, J.L., et al. Advances in the selection of patients with prostate cancer for active surveillance. Nat Rev Urol, 2021. 18: 197.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33623103
669.Cunningham, M., et al. Patient reported factors influencing the decision-making process of men with localised prostate cancer when considering Active Surveillance-A systematic review and thematic synthesis. Psychooncology, 2022. 31: 388.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34605104
670.Briggs, R.J., et al. The lived experience of active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-synthesis. J Cancer Surviv, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39939565
671.Klotz, L., et al. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28: 126.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19917860
672.Ahlberg, M.S., et al. Variations in the Uptake of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer and Its Impact on Outcomes. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2023. 52: 166.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37284040
673.Matsukawa, A., et al. Nonsurgical Interventions to Prevent Disease Progression in Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38277189
674.Shore, N.D., et al. Enzalutamide Monotherapy vs Active Surveillance in Patients With Low-risk or Intermediate-risk Localized Prostate Cancer: The ENACT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2022. 8: 1128.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35708696
675.Adolfsson, J. Watchful waiting and active surveillance: the current position. BJU Int, 2008. 102: 10.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18422774
676.Kretschmer, A., et al. Perioperative patient education improves long-term satisfaction rates of low-risk prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy. World J Urol, 2017. 35: 1205.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28093628
677.Gyomber, D., et al. Improving informed consent for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy using multimedia techniques: a prospective randomized crossover study. BJU Int, 2010. 106: 1152.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20346048
678.Huber, J., et al. Multimedia support for improving preoperative patient education: a randomized controlled trial using the example of radical prostatectomy. Ann Surg Oncol, 2013. 20: 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22851045
679.Wake, N., et al. Patient-specific 3D printed and augmented reality kidney and prostate cancer models: impact on patient education. 3D Print Med, 2019. 5: 4.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30783869
680.Day, E., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of preoperative surgical planning in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy on trifecta outcomes. Minerva Urol Nephrol, 2025. 77: 25.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40183180
681.Veerman, H., et al. A standardized method to measure the membranous urethral length (MUL) on MRI of the prostate with high inter- and intra-observer agreement. Eur Radiol, 2023. 33: 3295.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36512044
682.Peyrottes, A., et al. Anatomic Factors Associated with Complications After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2025. 8: 554.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39562217
683.Wang, C.J., et al. Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes in obese patients undergoing Da Vinci robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Urol, 2024. 24: 207.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39313813
684.Gu, L., et al. Does previous transurethral resection of the prostate negatively influence subsequent robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in men diagnosed with prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg, 2023. 17: 1299.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37020054
685.Hu, A., et al. Does transurethral resection of the prostate before robot-assisted radical prostatectomy have adverse effects on patients diagnosed with prostate cancer: a comparative evidence-based analysis? J Robot Surg, 2025. 19: 74.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39976864
686.Walsh, P.C., et al. Radical prostatectomy and cystoprostatectomy with preservation of potency. Results using a new nerve-sparing technique. Br J Urol, 1984. 56: 694.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6534493
687.Walz, J., et al. A Critical Analysis of the Current Knowledge of Surgical Anatomy of the Prostate Related to Optimisation of Cancer Control and Preservation of Continence and Erection in Candidates for Radical Prostatectomy: An Update. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 301.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26850969
688.Xiang, P., et al. Is there any difference in urinary continence between bilateral and unilateral nerve sparing during radical prostatectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol, 2024. 22: 66.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38395861
689.Michl, U., et al. Nerve-sparing Surgery Technique, Not the Preservation of the Neurovascular Bundles, Leads to Improved Long-term Continence Rates After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 584.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26277303
690.Vis, A.N., et al. Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJUI Compass, 2022. 3: 6.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35475150
691.Preisser, F., et al. Association of neurovascular bundle preservation with oncological outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 193.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32814844
692.Moris, L., et al. Evaluation of Oncological Outcomes and Data Quality in Studies Assessing Nerve-sparing Versus Non-Nerve-sparing Radical Prostatectomy in Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 690.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34147405
693.Kozikowski, M., et al. Clinical utility of MRI in the decision-making process before radical prostatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 2019. 14: e0210194.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30615661
694.Kroon, L.J., et al. Neurovascular Structure-adjacent Frozen-section Examination (NeuroSAFE) During Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39730246
695.Dinneen, E., et al. Effect of NeuroSAFE-guided RARP versus standard RARP on erectile function and urinary continence in patients with localised prostate cancer (NeuroSAFE PROOF): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2025. 26: 447.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40147459
696.Bellangino, M., et al. Systematic Review of Studies Reporting Positive Surgical Margins After Bladder Neck Sparing Radical Prostatectomy. Curr Urol Rep, 2017. 18: 99.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29116405
697.Nyarangi-Dix, J.N., et al. Complete bladder neck preservation promotes long-term post-prostatectomy continence without compromising midterm oncological outcome: analysis of a randomised controlled cohort. World J Urol, 2018. 36: 349.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214353
698.Ma, X., et al. Bladder neck preservation improves time to continence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget, 2016. 7: 67463.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27634899
699.Lardas, M., et al. Patient- and Tumour-related Prognostic Factors for Urinary Incontinence After Radical Prostatectomy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 674.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33967010
700.Mungovan, S.F., et al. Preoperative Membranous Urethral Length Measurement and Continence Recovery Following Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 368.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27394644
701.van Dijk-de Haan, M.C., et al. Value of Different Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Measurements of Anatomical Structures on Preoperative Prostate Imaging in Predicting Urinary Continence After Radical Prostatectomy in Men with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 1211.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35181284
702.Steiner, M.S., et al. Impact of anatomical radical prostatectomy on urinary continence. J Urol, 1991. 145: 512.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1997701
703.Li, H., et al. The Use of Unidirectional Barbed Suture for Urethrovesical Anastomosis during Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety. PLoS One, 2015. 10: e0131167.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26135310
704.Kowalewski, K.F., et al. Interrupted versus Continuous Suturing for Vesicourethral Anastomosis During Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2019. 5: 980.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29907547
705.Matsuyama, H., et al. Running suture versus interrupted suture for vesicourethral anastomosis in retropubic radical prostatectomy: a randomized study. Int J Urol, 2015. 22: 271.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25400263
706.Wiatr, T., et al. Single Running Suture versus Single-Knot Running Suture for Vesicourethral Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Prospective Randomised Comparative Study. Urol Int, 2015. 95: 445.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26655169
707.Van Velthoven, R.F., et al. Technique for laparoscopic running urethrovesical anastomosis:the single knot method. Urology, 2003. 61: 699.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12670546
708.Joshi, N., et al. Impact of posterior musculofascial reconstruction on early continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: results of a prospective parallel group trial. Eur Urol, 2010. 58: 84.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20362386
709.Sutherland, D.E., et al. Posterior rhabdosphincter reconstruction during robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: results from a phase II randomized clinical trial. J Urol, 2011. 185: 1262.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21334025
710.Jeong, C.W., et al. Effects of new 1-step posterior reconstruction method on recovery of continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: results of a prospective, single-blind, parallel group, randomized, controlled trial. J Urol, 2015. 193: 935.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25315960
711.Menon, M., et al. Assessment of early continence after reconstruction of the periprostatic tissues in patients undergoing computer assisted (robotic) prostatectomy: results of a 2 group parallel randomized controlled trial. J Urol, 2008. 180: 1018.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18639300
712.Jia, Z., et al. Sustainable functional urethral reconstruction improves early urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJU Int, 2023. 131: 720.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36545839
713.Stolzenburg, J.U., et al. Influence of bladder neck suspension stitches on early continence after radical prostatectomy: a prospective randomized study of 180 patients. Asian J Androl, 2011. 13: 806.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21909121
714.Hurtes, X., et al. Anterior suspension combined with posterior reconstruction during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy improves early return of urinary continence: a prospective randomized multicentre trial. BJU Int, 2012. 110: 875.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22260307
715.Student, V., Jr., et al. Advanced Reconstruction of Vesicourethral Support (ARVUS) during Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: One-year Functional Outcomes in a Two-group Randomised Controlled Trial. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 822.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27283216
716.Noguchi, M., et al. A randomized clinical trial of suspension technique for improving early recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int, 2008. 102: 958.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18485031
717.Barakat, B., et al. Retzius Sparing Radical Prostatectomy Versus Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Which Technique Is More Beneficial for Prostate Cancer Patients (MASTER Study)? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 1060.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34429272
718.Lv, T., et al. Oncological and functional outcomes of Retzius-sparing vs. standard robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: evidence on randomized-controlled trials studies. J Robot Surg, 2025. 19: 165.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40257521
719.Barayan, G.A., et al. Intermediate-Term Oncologic Outcome Assessment for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Comparing Retzius-Sparing with Standard Approach in a Randomized Control Cohort. J Endourol, 2024. 38: 559.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38429913
720.Bravi, C.A., et al. Impact of Early Dorsal Venous Complex Ligation on Urinary Continence Recovery after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Results from a Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 83.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36154808
721.Feng, T., et al. Randomised comparison of techniques for control of the dorsal venous complex during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int, 2020. 126: 586.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32521115
722.Beulens, A.J.W., et al. Linking surgical skills to postoperative outcomes: a Delphi study on the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg, 2019. 13: 675.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30610535
723.Gilbert, S.M., et al. Functional Outcomes Following Nerve Sparing Prostatectomy Augmented with Seminal Vesicle Sparing Compared to Standard Nerve Sparing Prostatectomy: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Urol, 2017. 198: 600.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28392393
724.Schoeppler, G.M., et al. The impact of bladder neck mucosal eversion during open radical prostatectomy on bladder neck stricture and urinary extravasation. Int Urol Nephrol, 2012. 44: 1403.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22585294
725.Borboroglu, P.G., et al. Risk factors for vesicourethral anastomotic stricture after radical prostatectomy. Urology, 2000. 56: 96.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10869633
726.Roemeling, S., et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome. Eur Urol, 2007. 51: 1244.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17161520
727.Alhusseinawi, H., et al. Low- versus standard- pneumoperitoneum in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a randomised, triple-blinded study. BJU Int, 2023. 132: 560.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37358048
728.Ozveren, B., et al. Checking vesicourethral anastomosis for urinary extravasation during radical prostatectomy: is it still necessary in the robotic era? A prospective, randomized case-control study. World J Urol, 2024. 42: 493.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39172139
729.Tillier, C., et al. Vesico-urethral anastomosis (VUA) evaluation of short- and long-term outcome after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP): selective cystogram to improve outcome. J Robot Surg, 2017. 11: 441.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28078524
730.Porcaro, A.B., et al. Is a Drain Needed After Robotic Radical Prostatectomy With or Without Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection? Results of a Single-Center Randomized Clinical Trial. J Endourol, 2021. 35: 922.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30398382
731.Chenam, A., et al. Prospective randomised non-inferiority trial of pelvic drain placement vs no pelvic drain placement after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int, 2018. 121: 357.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28872774
732.Grossmann, N.C., et al. Impact of patient positioning during surgery on neuropathies after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJU Int, 2025. 135: 802.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39668142
733.Cornelius, J., et al. Postoperative peripheral neuropathies associated with patient positioning during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP): A systematic review of the literature. Prostate, 2021. 81: 361.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33764601
734.Mukkala, A.N., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of unplanned hospital visits and re-admissions following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Can Urol Assoc J, 2021. 15: E531.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33750517
735.Ramsay, C., et al. Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer. Health Technol Assess, 2012. 16: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23127367
736.Novara, G., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2012. 62: 382.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22749851
737.Novara, G., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2012. 62: 431.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22749853
738.Ficarra, V., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2012. 62: 418.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22749850
739.Ficarra, V., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2012. 62: 405.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22749852
740.Maffezzini, M., et al. Evaluation of complications and results in a contemporary series of 300 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies with the anatomic approach at a single institution. Urology, 2003. 61: 982.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12736020
741.Haglind, E., et al. Urinary Incontinence and Erectile Dysfunction After Robotic Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Prospective, Controlled, Nonrandomised Trial. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 216.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25770484
742.Yaxley, J.W., et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet, 2016. 388: 1057.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27474375
743.Nahas, W.C., et al. Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy and Open Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Urol, 2024. 212: 32.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38723593
744.Haney, C.M., et al. Robot-assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 930.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37353415
745.Checcucci, E., et al. Ten-year functional and oncological outcomes of a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Prostate, 2024. 84: 832.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38572570
746.Viani, G.A., et al. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy reduces toxicity with similar biochemical control compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A randomized clinical trial. Cancer, 2016. 122: 2004.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27028170
747.Yu, T., et al. The Effectiveness of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy versus Three-Dimensional Radiation Therapy in Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of the Literatures. PLoS One, 2016. 11: e0154499.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27171271
748.de Crevoisier, R., et al. Daily Versus Weekly Prostate Cancer Image Guided Radiation Therapy: Phase 3 Multicenter Randomized Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2018. 102: 1420.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30071296
749.Murray, J., et al. A randomised assessment of image guided radiotherapy within a phase 3 trial of conventional or hypofractionated high dose intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol, 2020. 142: 62.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31767473
750.Tocco, B.R., et al. MR-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. Front Oncol, 2020. 10: 616291.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33363041
751.Christiansen, R.L., et al. Online adaptive radiotherapy potentially reduces toxicity for high-risk prostate cancer treatment. Radiother Oncol, 2022. 167: 165.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34923034
752.Tetar, S.U., et al. Magnetic Resonance-guided Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Final Results on Patient-reported Outcomes of a Prospective Phase 2 Study. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 628.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32536573
753.Kishan, A.U., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided vs Computed Tomography-Guided Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: The MIRAGE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2023. 9: 365.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36633877
754.Kishan, A.U., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Computed Tomography Guidance for Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer: 2-year Outcomes from the MIRAGE Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 622.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39537438
755.Kishan, A.U., et al. Local Failure and Survival After Definitive Radiotherapy for Aggressive Prostate Cancer: An Individual Patient-level Meta-analysis of Six Randomized Trials. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 201.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31718822
756.Michalski, J.M., et al. Effect of Standard vs Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: The NRG Oncology RTOG 0126 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2018. 4: e180039.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29543933
757.Zietman, A.L., et al. Randomized trial comparing conventional-dose with high-dose conformal radiation therapy in early-stage adenocarcinoma of the prostate: long-term results from proton radiation oncology group/american college of radiology 95-09. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28: 1106.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20124169
758.Viani, G.A., et al. Higher-than-conventional radiation doses in localized prostate cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2009. 74: 1405.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19616743
759.Peeters, S.T., et al. Dose-response in radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: results of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy. J Clin Oncol, 2006. 24: 1990.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16648499
760.Beckendorf, V., et al. 70 Gy versus 80 Gy in localized prostate cancer: 5-year results of GETUG 06 randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2011. 80: 1056.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21147514
761.Heemsbergen, W.D., et al. Long-term results of the Dutch randomized prostate cancer trial: impact of dose-escalation on local, biochemical, clinical failure, and survival. Radiother Oncol, 2014. 110: 104.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24246414
762.Dearnaley, D.P., et al. Escalated-dose versus control-dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: long-term results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol, 2014. 15: 464.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24581940
763.Pasalic, D., et al. Dose Escalation for Prostate Adenocarcinoma: A Long-Term Update on the Outcomes of a Phase 3, Single Institution Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2019. 104: 790.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30836166
764.Kalbasi, A., et al. Dose-Escalated Irradiation and Overall Survival in Men With Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer. JAMA Oncol, 2015. 1: 897.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26181727
765.Kerkmeijer, L.G.W., et al. Focal Boost to the Intraprostatic Tumor in External Beam Radiotherapy for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer: Results From the FLAME Randomized Phase III Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2021. 39: 787.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33471548
766.Menne Guricova, K., et al. Focal Boost to the Intraprostatic Tumor in External Beam Radiotherapy for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer: 10-Year Outcomes of the FLAME Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2025. 43: 3065.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40758955
767.Groen, V.H., et al. Patterns of Failure Following External Beam Radiotherapy With or Without an Additional Focal Boost in the Randomized Controlled FLAME Trial for Localized Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2022. 82: 252.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34953603
768.Poon, D.M.C., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging–guided Focal Boost to Intraprostatic Lesions Using External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 116.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41429687/
769.Fowler, J.F. The radiobiology of prostate cancer including new aspects of fractionated radiotherapy. Acta Oncol, 2005. 44: 265.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16076699
770.Dasu, A., et al. Prostate alpha/beta revisited -- an analysis of clinical results from 14 168 patients. Acta Oncol, 2012. 51: 963.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22966812
771.Kuban, D.A., et al. Preliminary Report of a Randomized Dose Escalation Trial for Prostate Cancer using Hypofractionation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2010. 78: S58.
http://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(10)01144-2/abstract
772.Pollack, A., et al. Randomized trial of hypofractionated external-beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2013. 31: 3860.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24101042
773.Lee, W.R., et al. Randomized Phase III Noninferiority Study Comparing Two Radiotherapy Fractionation Schedules in Patients With Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 2325.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27044935
774.Dearnaley, D., et al. Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial. Lancet Oncol, 2016. 17: 1047.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27339115
775.Incrocci, L., et al. Hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with localised prostate cancer (HYPRO): final efficacy results from a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2016. 17: 1061.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27339116
776.Catton, C.N., et al. Randomized Trial of a Hypofractionated Radiation Regimen for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2017. 35: 1884.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28296582
777.Koontz, B.F., et al. A systematic review of hypofractionation for primary management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 683.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25171903
778.Hocht, S., et al. Hypofractionated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Strahlenther Onkol, 2017. 193: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27628966
779.Hickey, B.E., et al. Hypofractionation for clinically localized prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019. 9: CD011462.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31476800
780.Kishan, A.U., et al. Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYDRA): an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials in the MARCAP consortium. Lancet Oncol, 2025. 26: 459.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40112848
781.Niazi, T., et al. Hypofractionated, Dose Escalation Radiation Therapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer: The Safety Analysis of the Prostate Cancer Study-5, a Groupe de Radio-Oncologie Génito-Urinaire de Quebec Led Phase 3 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2023. 118: 52.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37224928
782.Niazi, T., et al. Hypofractionated Dose Escalation Radiotherapy for High-risk Prostate Cancer: The Survival Analysis of the Prostate Cancer Study 5, a Groupe de Radio-oncologie Genito-urinaire du Quebec-led Phase 3 Trial. Eur Urol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39271420
783.Glicksman, R.M., et al. Randomized Trial of Concomitant Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Boost Versus Conventionally Fractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Boost for Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer (pHART2-RCT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2024. 119: 100.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37979707
784.Buyyounouski, M.K., et al. Noninferiority of Hypofractionated vs Conventional Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy for Genitourinary and Gastrointestinal Symptoms: The NRG-GU003 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2024. 10: 584.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38483412
785.Widmark, A., et al. Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the HYPO-RT-PC randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet, 2019. 394: 385.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31227373
786.van As, N., et al. Phase 3 Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2024. 391: 1413.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39413377
787.Nilsson, P., et al. 4981 Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: 10-year outcomes of the HYPO-RT-PC phase 3 trial (ISRCTN45905321). Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2025. 206.
https://www.thegreenjournal.com/article/S0167-8140(25)04191-X/abstract
788.Brand, D.H., et al. Intensity-modulated fractionated radiotherapy versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer (PACE-B): acute toxicity findings from an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 1531.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31540791
789.Tree, A.C., et al. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer (PACE-B): 2-year toxicity results from an open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol, 2022. 23: 1308.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36113498
790.Rasmusson, E., et al. Erectile Dysfunction and Absorbed Dose to Penile Base Structures in a Randomized Trial Comparing Ultrahypofractionated and Conventionally Fractionated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 107: 143.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32004582
791.Greco, C., et al. Safety and Efficacy of Virtual Prostatectomy With Single-Dose Radiotherapy in Patients With Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From the PROSINT Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 700.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33704378
792.Bolla, M., et al. External irradiation with or without long-term androgen suppression for prostate cancer with high metastatic risk: 10-year results of an EORTC randomised study. Lancet Oncol, 2010. 11: 1066.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20933466
793.Pilepich, M.V., et al. Androgen suppression adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in prostate carcinoma--long-term results of phase III RTOG 85-31. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2005. 61: 1285.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15817329
794.Roach, M., 3rd, et al. Short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy and external-beam radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term results of RTOG 8610. J Clin Oncol, 2008. 26: 585.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18172188
795.D'Amico, A.V., et al. Androgen suppression and radiation vs radiation alone for prostate cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA, 2008. 299: 289.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18212313
796.Denham, J.W., et al. Short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation and radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: 10-year data from the TROG 96.01 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol, 2011. 12: 451.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21440505
797.Lawton, C.A., et al. An update of the phase III trial comparing whole pelvic to prostate only radiotherapy and neoadjuvant to adjuvant total androgen suppression: updated analysis of RTOG 94-13, with emphasis on unexpected hormone/radiation interactions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2007. 69: 646.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17531401
798.Horwitz, E.M., et al. Ten-year follow-up of radiation therapy oncology group protocol 92-02: a phase III trial of the duration of elective androgen deprivation in locally advanced prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2008. 26: 2497.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18413638
799.Bolla, M., et al. Duration of androgen suppression in the treatment of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2009. 360: 2516.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19516032
800.Pisansky, T.M., et al. Duration of androgen suppression before radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: radiation therapy oncology group randomized clinical trial 9910. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 332.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25534388
801.Nabid, A., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: A randomised phase III trial. Eur J Cancer, 2021. 143: 64.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33279855
802.Krauss, D.J., et al. Dose-Escalated Radiotherapy Alone or in Combination With Short-Term Androgen Deprivation for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results of a Phase III Multi-Institutional Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2023. 41: 3203.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37104748
803.Kishan, A.U., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy use and duration with definitive radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol, 2022. 23: 304.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35051385
804.Spratt, D.E., et al. Prostate Radiotherapy With Adjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) Improves Metastasis-Free Survival Compared to Neoadjuvant ADT: An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis. J Clin Oncol, 2021. 39: 136.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33275486
805.Malone, S., et al. Sequencing of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy With External-Beam Radiotherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: A Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 593.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31829912
806.Efstathiou, J.A., et al. Prostate Advanced Radiation Technologies Investigating Quality of Life (PARTIQoL): Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial of Proton Therapy vs. IMRT for Localized Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2024. 120: S1.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360301624032371
807.Lee, W.R., et al. NRG Oncology RTOG 0415: A randomized phase III non-inferiority study comparing two fractionation schedules in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2024. 34: 1.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/jco.2016.34.2_suppl.1
808.de Vries, K.C., et al. Hyprofractionated Versus Conventionally Fractionated Radiation Therapy for Patients with Intermediate- or High-Risk, Localized, Prostate Cancer: 7-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase 3 HYPRO Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 106: 108.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31593756
809.Fossa, S.D., et al. Ten- and 15-yr Prostate Cancer-specific Mortality in Patients with Nonmetastatic Locally Advanced or Aggressive Intermediate Prostate Cancer, Randomized to Lifelong Endocrine Treatment Alone or Combined with Radiotherapy: Final Results of The Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-7. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 684.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025586
810.Mason, M.D., et al. Final Report of the Intergroup Randomized Study of Combined Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Plus Radiotherapy Versus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy Alone in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 2143.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25691677
811.Sargos, P., et al. Long-term androgen deprivation, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer: updated results from a phase III randomised trial. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 810.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30946523
812.Excellence, N.I.f.H.a.C. Biodegradable spacer insertion to reduce rectal toxicity during radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Interventional procedures guidance [IPG590]. 2017. 2022.
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ipg590
813.Wong, C.H., et al. Does biodegradable peri-rectal spacer mitigate treatment toxicities in radiation therapy for localised prostate cancer-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2025. 28: 927.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40148672
814.Aminsharifi, A., et al. Major Complications and Adverse Events Related to the Injection of the SpaceOAR Hydrogel System Before Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Review of the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database. J Endourol, 2019. 33: 868.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31452385
815.Henry, A., et al. GEC-ESTRO ACROP prostate brachytherapy guidelines. Radiother Oncol, 2022. 167: 244.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34999134
816.Martens, C., et al. Relationship of the International Prostate Symptom score with urinary flow studies, and catheterization rates following 125I prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy, 2006. 5: 9.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16563992
817.Michalski, J.M., et al. Effect of Brachytherapy With External Beam Radiation Therapy Versus Brachytherapy Alone for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: NRG Oncology RTOG 0232 Randomized Clinical Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2023. 41: 4035.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37315297
818.Le, H., et al. The influence of prostate volume on outcome after high-dose-rate brachytherapy alone for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2013. 87: 270.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23849693
819.Salembier, C., et al. A history of transurethral resection of the prostate should not be a contra-indication for low-dose-rate (125)I prostate brachytherapy: results of a prospective Uro-GEC phase-II trial. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 2020. 12: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32190063
820.Salembier, C., et al. Prospective multi-center dosimetry study of low-dose Iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy performed after transurethral resection. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 2013. 5: 63.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23878549
821.Stone, N.N., et al. Prostate brachytherapy in men with gland volume of 100cc or greater: Technique, cancer control, and morbidity. Brachytherapy, 2013. 12: 217.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23384439
822.Crook, J.M., et al. Comparison of health-related quality of life 5 years after SPIRIT: Surgical Prostatectomy Versus Interstitial Radiation Intervention Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2011. 29: 362.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21149658
823.Sylvester, J.E., et al. Fifteen-year biochemical relapse-free survival, cause-specific survival, and overall survival following I(125) prostate brachytherapy in clinically localized prostate cancer: Seattle experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2011. 81: 376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20864269
824.Potters, L., et al. 12-year outcomes following permanent prostate brachytherapy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol, 2005. 173: 1562.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15821486
825.Stone, N.N., et al. Intermediate term biochemical-free progression and local control following 125iodine brachytherapy for prostate cancer. J Urol, 2005. 173: 803.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15711273
826.Zelefsky, M.J., et al. Multi-institutional analysis of long-term outcome for stages T1-T2 prostate cancer treated with permanent seed implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2007. 67: 327.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17084558
827.Lawton, C.A., et al. Results of a phase II trial of transrectal ultrasound-guided permanent radioactive implantation of the prostate for definitive management of localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate (radiation therapy oncology group 98-05). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2007. 67: 39.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17084551
828.Stock, R.G., et al. Importance of post-implant dosimetry in permanent prostate brachytherapy. Eur Urol, 2002. 41: 434.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12074816
829.Keyes, M., et al. American Brachytherapy Society Task Group Report: Use of androgen deprivation therapy with prostate brachytherapy-A systematic literature review. Brachytherapy, 2017. 16: 245.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28110898
830.Morris, W.J., et al. Androgen Suppression Combined with Elective Nodal and Dose Escalated Radiation Therapy (the ASCENDE-RT Trial): An Analysis of Survival Endpoints for a Randomized Trial Comparing a Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost to a Dose-Escalated External Beam Boost for High- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2017. 98: 275.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28262473
831.Oh, J., et al. An Updated Analysis of the Survival Endpoints of ASCENDE-RT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2023. 115: 1061.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36528488
832.Rodda, S., et al. ASCENDE-RT: An Analysis of Treatment-Related Morbidity for a Randomized Trial Comparing a Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost with a Dose-Escalated External Beam Boost for High- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2017. 98: 286.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28433432
833.Hoskin, P.J., et al. GEC/ESTRO recommendations on high dose rate afterloading brachytherapy for localised prostate cancer: an update. Radiother Oncol, 2013. 107: 325.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23773409
834.Galalae, R.M., et al. Long-term outcome after elective irradiation of the pelvic lymphatics and local dose escalation using high-dose-rate brachytherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2002. 52: 81.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11777625
835.Miszczyk, M., et al. Brachytherapy boost improves survival and decreases risk of developing distant metastases compared to external beam radiotherapy alone in intermediate and high risk group prostate cancer patients. Radiother Oncol, 2023. 183: 109632.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36963442
836.Pieters, B.R., et al. Comparison of three radiotherapy modalities on biochemical control and overall survival for the treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Radiother Oncol, 2009. 93: 168.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19748692
837.Parry, M.G., et al. Impact of High-Dose-Rate and Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost on Toxicity, Functional and Cancer Outcomes in Patients Receiving External Beam Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A National Population-Based Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2021. 109: 1219.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33279595
838.Hoskin, P.J., et al. Randomised trial of external-beam radiotherapy alone or with high-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Mature 12-year results. Radiother Oncol, 2021. 154: 214.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33011207
839.Joseph, D., et al. Radiation Dose Escalation or Longer Androgen Suppression to Prevent Distant Progression in Men With Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: 10-Year Data From the TROG 03.04 RADAR Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 106: 693.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32092343
840.Jackson, W.C., et al. Addition of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy or Brachytherapy Boost to External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 3024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32396488
841.Viani, G.A., et al. HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Brachytherapy, 2021. 20: 307.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33461894
842.Hudson, J.M., et al. Prostate high dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer: Efficacy results from a randomized phase II clinical trial of one fraction of 19 Gy or two fractions of 13.5 Gy: A 9-year update. Radiother Oncol, 2024. 198: 110381.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38879130
843.Matzinger, O., et al. Acute toxicity of curative radiotherapy for intermediate- and high-risk localised prostate cancer in the EORTC trial 22991. Eur J Cancer, 2009. 45: 2825.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19682889
844.Crook, J., et al. A Randomized Trial Comparing Quality of Life After Low-Dose Rate or High-Dose Rate Prostate Brachytherapy Boost With Pelvic External Beam Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2024. 120: 59.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38493901/
845.King, C.R., et al. Health-related quality of life after stereotactic body radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: results from a multi-institutional consortium of prospective trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2013. 87: 939.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24119836
846.Fahmy, W.E., et al. Cryosurgery for prostate cancer. Arch Androl, 2003. 49: 397.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12893518
847.Rees, J., et al. Cryosurgery for prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2004. 93: 710.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15049977
848.Han, K.R., et al. Third-generation cryosurgery for primary and recurrent prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2004. 93: 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14678360
849.van der Poel, H.G., et al. Focal Therapy in Primary Localised Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 84.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29373215
850.Valerio, M., et al. New and Established Technology in Focal Ablation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 17.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27595377
851.Madersbacher, S., et al. High-energy shockwaves and extracorporeal high-intensity focused ultrasound. J Endourol, 2003. 17: 667.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14622487
852.Rubinsky, B., et al. Irreversible electroporation: a new ablation modality--clinical implications. Technol Cancer Res Treat, 2007. 6: 37.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17241099
853.Ramsay, C.R., et al. Ablative therapy for people with localised prostate cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess, 2015. 19: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26140518
854.Guang, Z.L.P., et al. Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Whole-Gland HIFU as the Primary Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2024. 22: 102101.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38811288
855.Pan, Y., et al. Whole-gland high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation and transurethral resection of the prostate in the patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol, 2022. 12: 988490.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36313706
856.Brundl, J., et al. Oncological Long-term Outcome After Whole-gland High-intensity Focused Ultrasound for Prostate Cancer-21-yr Follow-up. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 134.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33483288
857.Dickinson, L., et al. Medium-term Outcomes after Whole-gland High-intensity Focused Ultrasound for the Treatment of Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer from a Multicentre Registry Cohort. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 668.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26951947
858.Mouraviev, V., et al. Pathologic basis of focal therapy for early-stage prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol, 2009. 6: 205.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19352395
859.Cooperberg, M.R., et al. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol, 2007. 178: S14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17644125
860.Polascik, T.J., et al. Pathologic stage T2a and T2b prostate cancer in the recent prostate-specific antigen era: implications for unilateral ablative therapy. Prostate, 2008. 68: 1380.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18543281
861.Ahmed, H.U., et al. Will focal therapy become a standard of care for men with localized prostate cancer? Nat Clin Pract Oncol, 2007. 4: 632.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17965641
862.Eggener, S.E., et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol, 2007. 178: 2260.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17936815
863.Crawford, E.D., et al. Targeted focal therapy: a minimally invasive ablation technique for early prostate cancer. Oncology (Williston Park), 2007. 21: 27.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17313155
864.Hopstaken, J.S., et al. An Updated Systematic Review on Focal Therapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: What Has Changed over the Past 5 Years? Eur Urol, 2022. 81: 5.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34489140
865.Busby, D., et al. Biopsy and Erectile Functional Outcomes of Partial Prostate Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Urology, 2023. 182: 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37774854
866.Reddy, D., et al. Cancer Control Outcomes Following Focal Therapy Using High-intensity Focused Ultrasound in 1379 Men with Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: A Multi-institute 15-year Experience. Eur Urol, 2022. 81: 407.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35123819
867.Zhang, K., et al. Irreversible Electroporation for the Focal Treatment of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. World J Mens Health, 2025. 43: 321.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39028129
868.Zhang, K., et al. A multi-center international study to evaluate the safety, functional and oncological outcomes of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024. 27: 525.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38195916
869.Hamdy, F.C., et al. Partial ablation versus radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: the PART feasibility RCT. Health Technol Assess, 2018. 22: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30264692
870.Baco, E., Vlakovic, L., Rud, E. , MP46-06 Focal ablation versus radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer: interim analysis of a randomized controlled Trial, in AUA-2021. 2021, AUA: Las Vegas, USA.
https://www.auajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1097/JU.0000000000002067.06
871.Reddy, D., et al. Comparative healthcare research outcomes of novel Surgery in prostate cancer (IP4-CHRONOS): Pilot RCT assessing feasibility of randomization for focal therapy in localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2022. 40: 5086.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.5086
872.Shah, T.T., et al. Focal therapy compared to radical prostatectomy for non-metastatic prostate cancer: a propensity score-matched study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 567.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33504940
873.van Son, M.J., et al. Conventional radical versus focal treatment for localised prostate cancer: a propensity score weighted comparison of 6-year tumour control. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 1120.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33934114
874.Lovegrove, C.E., et al. Evaluation of functional outcomes after a second focal high-intensity focused ultrasonography (HIFU) procedure in men with primary localized, non-metastatic prostate cancer: results from the HIFU Evaluation and Assessment of Treatment (HEAT) registry. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 853.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31971335
875.Marconi, L., et al. Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy After Focal Therapy: Oncological, Functional Outcomes and Predictors of Recurrence. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 27.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30904357
876.Spitznagel, T., et al. Salvage Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Following Focal High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound for ISUP 2/3 Cancer. Urology, 2021. 156: 147.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34186136
877.Zwergel, U., et al. Outcome of prostate cancer patients with initial PSA> or =20 ng/ml undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2007. 52: 1058.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17418938
878.Magheli, A., et al. Importance of tumor location in patients with high preoperative prostate specific antigen levels (greater than 20 ng/ml) treated with radical prostatectomy. J Urol, 2007. 178: 1311.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17698095
879.Blank, F., et al. Salvage Radical Prostatectomy after Primary Focal Ablative Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel), 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37345064
880.Mohamad, O., et al. Salvage Radiotherapy Following Nonradiotherapy Ablative Techniques for Primary Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40221373
881.Gill, I.S., et al. Randomized Trial of Partial Gland Ablation with Vascular Targeted Phototherapy versus Active Surveillance for Low Risk Prostate Cancer: Extended Followup and Analyses of Effectiveness. J Urol, 2018. 200: 786.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29864437
882.Marra, G., et al. Long-term Outcomes of Focal Cryotherapy for Low- to Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: Results and Matched Pair Analysis with Active Surveillance. Eur Urol Focus, 2022. 8: 701.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926838
883.MacLennan, S., et al. A core outcome set for localised prostate cancer effectiveness trials. BJU Int, 2017. 120: E64.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28346770
884.Guillaumier, S., et al. A Multicentre Study of 5-year Outcomes Following Focal Therapy in Treating Clinically Significant Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 422.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29960750
885.McLeod, D.G., et al. Bicalutamide 150 mg plus standard care vs standard care alone for early prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2006. 97: 247.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16430622
886.Holmberg, L., et al. Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2024. 391: 1362.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39383464
887.Holmberg, L., et al. Time Dependence of Outcomes in the SPCG-4 Randomized Trial Comparing Radical Prostatectomy and Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2025. 88: 554.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40744802
888.Holmberg, L., et al. Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer. N Eng J Med, 2024. 391: 1362.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39383464/
889.Luo, X., et al. Prostatectomy Versus Observation for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Scand J Surg, 2021. 110: 78.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31662032
890.Kuperus, J.M., et al. Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection at Radical Prostatectomy for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Assessing Utility and Nodal Metastases Within a Statewide Quality Improvement Consortium. Urology, 2022. 165: 227.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35263639
891.James, N.D., et al. Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2016. 387: 1163.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26719232
892.Krauss, D., et al. Lack of benefit for the addition of androgen deprivation therapy to dose-escalated radiotherapy in the treatment of intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2011. 80: 1064.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20584576
893.Kupelian, P.A., et al. Effect of increasing radiation doses on local and distant failures in patients with localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2008. 71: 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17996382
894.King, M.T., et al. Low dose rate brachytherapy for primary treatment of localized prostate cancer: A systemic review and executive summary of an evidence-based consensus statement. Brachytherapy, 2021. 20: 1114.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34509378
895.Studer, U.E., et al. Using PSA to guide timing of androgen deprivation in patients with T0-4 N0-2 M0 prostate cancer not suitable for local curative treatment (EORTC 30891). Eur Urol, 2008. 53: 941.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18191322
896.Joniau, S., et al. Stratification of high-risk prostate cancer into prognostic categories: a European multi-institutional study. Eur Urol, 2015. 67: 157.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24486307
897.Donohue, J.F., et al. Poorly differentiated prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: long-term outcome and incidence of pathological downgrading. J Urol, 2006. 176: 991.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16890678
898.Laukhtina, E., et al. Oncologic impact of delaying radical prostatectomy in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 4085.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34047825
899.Nguyen, D.D., et al. Systematic Review of Time to Definitive Treatment for Intermediate Risk and High Risk Prostate Cancer: Are Delays Associated with Worse Outcomes? J Urol, 2021. 205: 1263.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33443458
900.Walz, J., et al. Pathological results and rates of treatment failure in high-risk prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int, 2011. 107: 765.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20875089
901.Briganti, A., et al. Natural history of surgically treated high-risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol, 2015. 33: 163 e7.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25665508
902.Kumar, S., et al. Neo-adjuvant and adjuvant hormone therapy for localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2006. 2006: CD006019.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17054269
903.Roach, M., et al. Sequence of hormonal therapy and radiotherapy field size in unfavourable, localised prostate cancer (NRG/RTOG 9413): long-term results of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2018. 19: 1504.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30316827
904.Murthy, V., et al. Prostate-Only Versus Whole-Pelvic Radiation Therapy in High-Risk and Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer (POP-RT): Outcomes From Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2021. 39: 1234.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33497252
905.Murthy, V., et al. Late toxicity and quality of life with prostate only or whole pelvic radiation therapy in high risk prostate cancer (POP-RT): A randomised trial. Radiother Oncol, 2020. 145: 71.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31923712
906.Moris, L., et al. Benefits and Risks of Primary Treatments for High-risk Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: An International Multidisciplinary Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 614.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32146018
907.Gongora, M., et al. Characteristics of Patients in SPCG-15-A Randomized Trial Comparing Radical Prostatectomy with Primary Radiotherapy plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Men with Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2022. 41: 63.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35813256
908.Bastian, P.J., et al. Clinical and pathologic outcome after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer patients with a preoperative Gleason sum of 8 to 10. Cancer, 2006. 107: 1265.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16900523
909.Yossepowitch, O., et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol, 2007. 178: 493.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17561152
910.Trails.gov, C. Surgery Versus Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer (SPCG-15). 2014. 2022.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02102477
911.Chang, K., et al. Comparison of two adjuvant hormone therapy regimens in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: primary results of study CU1005. Asian J Androl, 2016. 18: 452.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26323560
912.Spahn, M., et al. Outcome predictors of radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate-specific antigen greater than 20 ng/ml: a European multi-institutional study of 712 patients. Eur Urol, 2010. 58: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20299147
913.Ward, J.F., et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int, 2005. 95: 751.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15794776
914.Ravi, P., et al. Refining Risk Stratification of High-risk and Locoregional Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 217.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38777647
915.Hofman, M.S., et al. Baseline Nodal Status on (68)Ga-PSMA-11 Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Men with Intermediate- to High-risk Prostate Cancer Is Prognostic for Treatment Failure: Follow-up of the proPSMA Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39613566
916.Werner, R.A., et al. Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Reporting and Data System Version 2.0. Eur Urol, 2023. 84: 491.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37414701
917.Seifert, R., et al. Second Version of the Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging Standardized Evaluation Framework Including Response Evaluation for Clinical Trials (PROMISE V2). Eur Urol, 2023. 83: 405.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36935345
918.Stranne, J., et al. Use of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Nodal Staging in Prostate Cancer and Tailoring of Treatment: A Continuing Conundrum. Eur Urol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39701872
919.Yaow, C.Y.L., et al. Local Therapy on Clinically Lymph Node-positive Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 355.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37730526
920.James, N.D., et al. Failure-Free Survival and Radiotherapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Data From Patients in the Control Arm of the STAMPEDE Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2016. 2: 348.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26606329
921.James, N.D., et al. Docetaxel for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Outcomes in the STAMPEDE Randomized Controlled Trial. JNCI Cancer Spectr, 2022. 6.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35877084
922.Attard, G., et al. Abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with or without enzalutamide for high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of primary results from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol. Lancet, 2022. 399: 447.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34953525
923.Fizazi, K., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel and estramustine versus androgen deprivation therapy alone for high-risk localised prostate cancer (GETUG 12): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol, 2015. 16: 787.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26028518
924.Vale, C.L., et al. Addition of docetaxel or bisphosphonates to standard of care in men with localised or metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analyses of aggregate data. Lancet Oncol, 2016. 17: 243.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26718929
925.Bryant, A.K., et al. Definitive Radiation Therapy and Survival in Clinically Node-Positive Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2018. 101: 1188.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29891203
926.Sarkar, R.R., et al. Association between Radical Prostatectomy and Survival in Men with Clinically Node-positive Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2019. 2: 584.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31411995
927.Lin, C.C., et al. Androgen deprivation with or without radiation therapy for clinically node-positive prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015. 107.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25957435
928.Tward, J.D., et al. Radiation therapy for clinically node-positive prostate adenocarcinoma is correlated with improved overall and prostate cancer-specific survival. Pract Radiat Oncol, 2013. 3: 234.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24674370
929.Rusthoven, C.G., et al. The impact of definitive local therapy for lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a population-based study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2014. 88: 1064.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24661660
930.Seisen, T., et al. Efficacy of Local Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients with Clinically Pelvic Lymph Node-positive Disease at Initial Diagnosis. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 452.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28890245
931.Chierigo, F., et al. Survival after radical prostatectomy versus radiation therapy in clinical node-positive prostate cancer. Prostate, 2022. 82: 740.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35226380/
932.Elumalai, T., et al. Impact of prostate radiotherapy on survival outcomes in clinically node-positive prostate cancer: A multicentre retrospective analysis. Radiother Oncol, 2023. 186: 109746.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37330057
933.Studer, U.E., et al. Immediate or deferred androgen deprivation for patients with prostate cancer not suitable for local treatment with curative intent: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Trial 30891. J Clin Oncol, 2006. 24: 1868.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16622261
934.Wurnschimmel, C., et al. Radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: 20-year oncological outcomes from a German high-volume center. Urol Oncol, 2021. 39: 830 e17.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34092484
935.Bader, P., et al. Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol, 2002. 168: 514.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12131300
936.Briganti, A., et al. Two positive nodes represent a significant cut-off value for cancer specific survival in patients with node positive prostate cancer. A new proposal based on a two-institution experience on 703 consecutive N+ patients treated with radical prostatectomy, extended pelvic lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol, 2009. 55: 261.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18838212
937.Schumacher, M.C., et al. Good outcome for patients with few lymph node metastases after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2008. 54: 344.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18511183
938.Abdollah, F., et al. More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2015. 67: 212.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24882672
939.Pound, C.R., et al. Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA, 1999. 281: 1591.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10235151
940.Aus, G., et al. Prognostic factors and survival in node-positive (N1) prostate cancer-a prospective study based on data from a Swedish population-based cohort. Eur Urol, 2003. 43: 627.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12767363
941.Cheng, L., et al. Risk of prostate carcinoma death in patients with lymph node metastasis. Cancer, 2001. 91: 66.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11148561
942.Seiler, R., et al. Removal of limited nodal disease in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: long-term results confirm a chance for cure. J Urol, 2014. 191: 1280.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24262495
943.Passoni, N.M., et al. Prognosis of patients with pelvic lymph node (LN) metastasis after radical prostatectomy: value of extranodal extension and size of the largest LN metastasis. BJU Int, 2014. 114: 503.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24053552
944.Daneshmand, S., et al. Prognosis of patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: long-term results. J Urol, 2004. 172: 2252.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15538242
945.Touijer, K.A., et al. Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol, 2014. 65: 20.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23619390
946.Spratt, D.E., et al. Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of the Performance of the Decipher Genomic Classifier in High-Risk Men After Prostatectomy to Predict Development of Metastatic Disease. J Clin Oncol, 2017. 35: 1991.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28358655
947.Jairath, N.K., et al. A Systematic Review of the Evidence for the Decipher Genomic Classifier in Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2021. 79: 374.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33293078
948.Wiegel, T., et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait-and-see after radical prostatectomy: 10-year follow-up of the ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95 trial. Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 243.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24680359
949.Fossati, N., et al. Long-term Impact of Adjuvant Versus Early Salvage Radiation Therapy in pT3N0 Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radical Prostatectomy: Results from a Multi-institutional Series. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 886.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27484843
950.Buscariollo, D.L., et al. Long-term results of adjuvant versus early salvage postprostatectomy radiation: A large single-institutional experience. Pract Radiat Oncol, 2017. 7: e125.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28274403
951.Hwang, W.L., et al. Comparison Between Adjuvant and Early-Salvage Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer With Adverse Pathological Features. JAMA Oncol, 2018. 4: e175230.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29372236
952.Parker, C.C., et al. Timing of radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy (RP): long-term outcomes in the RADICALS-RT trial (NCT00541047). Ann Oncol, 2024. 35: 656.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38583574
953.Kneebone, A., et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy (TROG 08.03/ANZUP RAVES): a randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol, 2020. 21: 1331.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002437
954.Sargos, P., et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy plus short-term androgen deprivation therapy in men with localised prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (GETUG-AFU 17): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2020. 21: 1341.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002438
955.Vale, C.L., et al. Adjuvant or early salvage radiotherapy for the treatment of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer: a prospectively planned systematic review and meta-analysis of aggregate data. Lancet, 2020. 396: 1422.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002431
956.Parker, C.C., et al. Randomised Trial of No, Short-term, or Long-term Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Postoperative Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy: Results from the Three-way Comparison of RADICALS-HD (NCT00541047). Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 422.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39217077
957.Weiner, A.B., et al. Risk Stratification of Patients with Recurrence After Primary Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 200.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38782697
958.Pommier, P., et al. Prognostic factors in post-prostatectomy salvage radiotherapy setting with and without hormonotherapy: An individual patient data analysis of randomized trials from ICECaP database. Radiother Oncol, 2024. 201: 110532.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39278317
959.Tilki, D., et al. Adjuvant Versus Early Salvage Radiation Therapy for Men at High Risk for Recurrence Following Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer and the Risk of Death. J Clin Oncol, 2021. 39: 2284.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34086480
960.Tilki, D., et al. Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Lancet, 2020. 396: 1374.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002430
961.Ghadjar, P., et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Lancet, 2021. 397: 1623.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33933203
962.Thompson, I.M., et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathological T3N0M0 prostate cancer significantly reduces risk of metastases and improves survival: long-term followup of a randomized clinical trial. J Urol, 2009. 181: 956.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19167731
963.Bolla, M., et al. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet, 2012. 380: 2018.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23084481
964.Hackman, G., et al. Randomised Trial of Adjuvant Radiotherapy Following Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radical Prostatectomy Alone in Prostate Cancer Patients with Positive Margins or Extracapsular Extension. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 586.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31375279
965.Ahlgren, G.M., et al. Docetaxel Versus Surveillance After Radical Prostatectomy for High-risk Prostate Cancer: Results from the Prospective Randomised, Open-label Phase 3 Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 12 Trial. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 870.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29395502
966.Schweizer, M.T., et al. Adjuvant leuprolide with or without docetaxel in patients with high-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (TAX-3501): important lessons for future trials. Cancer, 2013. 119: 3610.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23943299
967.Ghavamian, R., et al. Radical retropubic prostatectomy plus orchiectomy versus orchiectomy alone for pTxN+ prostate cancer: a matched comparison. J Urol, 1999. 161: 1223.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10081874
968.Messing, E.M., et al. Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol, 2006. 7: 472.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16750497
969.Abdollah, F., et al. Impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on survival of patients with node-positive prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2014. 32: 3939.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25245445
970.Tilki, D., et al. Adjuvant Versus Early Salvage Radiation Therapy After Radical Prostatectomy for pN1 Prostate Cancer and the Risk of Death. J Clin Oncol, 2022. 40: 2186.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35290082
971.Abdollah, F., et al. Impact of Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Node-positive Prostate Cancer Patients: The Importance of Patient Selection. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 253.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29720348
972.Gupta, M., et al. Adjuvant radiation with androgen-deprivation therapy for men with lymph node metastases after radical prostatectomy: identifying men who benefit. BJU Int, 2019. 123: 252.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29626845
973.Marra, G., et al. Management of Patients with Node-positive Prostate Cancer at Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Oncol, 2020. 3: 565.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32933887
974.Tilki, D., et al. Adjuvant radiation therapy is associated with better oncological outcome compared with salvage radiation therapy in patients with pN1 prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. BJU Int, 2017. 119: 717.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27743493
975.Mandel, P., et al. Long-term oncological outcomes in patients with limited nodal disease undergoing radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection without adjuvant treatment. World J Urol, 2017. 35: 1833.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28828530
976.Kimura, S., et al. Prognostic Significance of Prostate-Specific Antigen Persistence after Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel), 2021. 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33668270
977.Ploussard, G., et al. Management of Persistently Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 150.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33574012
978.Semerjian, A., et al. Opportunities for Quality Improvement in Postoperative Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing After Radical Prostatectomy. Urol Pract, 2025. 12: 586.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40423559
979.Tilki, D., et al. Persistent Prostate-Specific Antigen Following Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer and Mortality Risk. JAMA Oncol, 2025. 11: 502.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40080000
980.Wu, S., et al. Clinicopathological and oncological significance of persistent prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Urol, 2023. 10: 317.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37538158
981.Sasaki, T., et al. Cribriform pattern 4/intraductal carcinoma of the prostate and persistent prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy. BJUI Compass, 2024. 5: 709.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39022662
982.van Leeuwen, P.J., et al. Gallium-68-prostate-specific membrane antigen ((68) Ga-PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) predicts complete biochemical response from radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2019. 124: 62.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30074667
983.Mazzone, E., et al. Which Patients with Prostate Cancer and Lymph Node Uptake at Preoperative Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography Scan Are at a Higher Risk of Prostate-specific Antigen Persistence After Radical Prostatectomy? Identifying Indicators of Systemic Disease by Integrating Clinical, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Functional Imaging Parameters. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 231.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37689506
984.Preisser, F., et al. Persistent Prostate-Specific Antigen After Radical Prostatectomy and Its Impact on Oncologic Outcomes. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 106.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30772034
985.Xiang, C., et al. Prediction of Biochemical Recurrence Following Radiotherapy among Patients with Persistent PSA after Radical Prostatectomy: A Single-Center Experience. Urol Int, 2018. 101: 47.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29627830
986.Rogers, C.G., et al. Natural history of disease progression in patients who fail to achieve an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level after undergoing radical prostatectomy. Cancer, 2004. 101: 2549.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15470681
987.Patel, A., et al. Recurrence patterns after radical retropubic prostatectomy: clinical usefulness of prostate specific antigen doubling times and log slope prostate specific antigen. J Urol, 1997. 158: 1441.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9302139
988.Gandaglia, G., et al. Impact of Postoperative Radiotherapy in Men with Persistently Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen After Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Long-term Survival Analysis. Eur Urol, 2017. 72: 910.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28622831
989.Schmidt-Hegemann, N.S., et al. Outcome after PSMA PET/CT based radiotherapy in patients with biochemical persistence or recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Radiat Oncol, 2018. 13: 37.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29499730
990.Meijer, D., et al. Biochemical Persistence of Prostate-Specific Antigen After Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Tumor Localizations Using PSMA PET/CT Imaging. J Nucl Med, 2021. 62: 961.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33158904
991.Sood, A., et al. Anti-Androgen Therapy Overcomes the Time Delay in Initiation of Salvage Radiation Therapy and Rescues the Oncological Outcomes in Men with Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy: A Post Hoc Analysis of the RTOG-9601 Trial Data. Ann Surg Oncol, 2022. 29: 7206.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35608801/
992.Wiegel, T., et al. Prostate-specific antigen persistence after radical prostatectomy as a predictive factor of clinical relapse-free survival and overall survival: 10-year data of the ARO 96-02 trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2015. 91: 288.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25445556
993.Bartkowiak, D., et al. The impact of prostate-specific antigen persistence after radical prostatectomy on the efficacy of salvage radiotherapy in patients with primary N0 prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2019. 124: 785.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31220400
994.Van den Broeck, T., et al. Prognostic Value of Biochemical Recurrence Following Treatment with Curative Intent for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 967.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30342843
995.Özman, O., et al. The Effect of Salvage Radiation Therapy on Survival, Functional Outcomes, and Quality of Life in Men with Persistent Prostate-specific Antigen After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Which Patient Benefits More? Pract Radiat Oncol, 2022. 12: e538.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35843543
996.Choo, R., et al. Prospective study evaluating postoperative radiotherapy plus 2-year androgen suppression for post-radical prostatectomy patients with pathologic T3 disease and/or positive surgical margins. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2009. 75: 407.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19211197
997.Garcia-Barreras, S., et al. Predictive factors and the important role of detectable prostate-specific antigen for detection of clinical recurrence and cancer-specific mortality following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Clin Transl Oncol, 2018. 20: 1004.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29243074
998.Lohm, G., et al. Salvage radiotherapy in patients with persistently detectable PSA or PSA rising from an undetectable range after radical prostatectomy gives comparable results. World J Urol, 2013. 31: 423.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22460203
999.Ploussard, G., et al. Clinical outcomes after salvage radiotherapy without androgen deprivation therapy in patients with persistently detectable PSA after radical prostatectomy: results from a national multicentre study. World J Urol, 2014. 32: 1331.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24270970
1000.Fossati, N., et al. Impact of Early Salvage Radiation Therapy in Patients with Persistently Elevated or Rising Prostate-specific Antigen After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 436.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28779974
1001.Shipley, W., et al. Radiation with or without Antiandrogen Therapy in Recurrent Prostate Cancer. N Eng J Med, 2017. 376: 417.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28146658/
1002.Pollack, A., et al. The addition of androgen deprivation therapy and pelvic lymph node treatment to prostate bed salvage radiotherapy (NRG Oncology/RTOG 0534 SPPORT): an international, multicentre, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet, 2022. 399: 1886.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35569466
1003.Parker, C.C., et al. Randomised Trial of No, Short-term, or Long-term Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Postoperative Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy: Results from the Three-way Comparison of RADICALS-HD (NCT00541047). Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 422.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39217077
1004.Carrie, C., et al. Short-term androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy as salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 16): a 112-month follow-up of a phase 3, randomised trial. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 1740.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31629656
1005.Guerif, S.G., et al. The acute toxicity results of the GETUG-AFU 22 study: A multicenter randomized phase II trial comparing the efficacy of a short hormone therapy in combination with radiotherapy to radiotherapy alone as a salvage treatment for patients with detectable PSA after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2017. 35: 16.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.6_suppl.16
1006.Tanegashima, T., et al. Prognosis based on postoperative PSA levels and treatment in prostate cancer with lymph node involvement. Int J Clin Oncol, 2024. 29: 1586.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38976182
1007.Arlen, P.M., et al. Prostate Specific Antigen Working Group guidelines on prostate specific antigen doubling time. J Urol, 2008. 179: 2181.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18423743
1008.Vickers, A.J., et al. PSA Velocity and Doubling Time in Diagnosis and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer. Br J Med Surg Urol, 2012. 5: 162.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22712027
1009.O'Brien, M.F., et al. Pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity and doubling time are associated with outcome but neither improves prediction of outcome beyond pretreatment PSA alone in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol, 2009. 27: 3591.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19506163
1010.Ramirez, M.L., et al. Current applications for prostate-specific antigen doubling time. Eur Urol, 2008. 54: 291.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18439749
1011.Vickers, A.J., et al. Systematic review of pretreatment prostate-specific antigen velocity and doubling time as predictors for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2009. 27: 398.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19064972
1012.Lee, A.K., et al. Utility of prostate-specific antigen kinetics in addition to clinical factors in the selection of patients for salvage local therapy. J Clin Oncol, 2005. 23: 8192.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16278472
1013.Campbell, S.R., et al. Integrating Prostate-specific Antigen Kinetics into Contemporary Predictive Nomograms of Salvage Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 304.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34016556
1014.Smith, M.R., et al. Natural history of rising serum prostate-specific antigen in men with castrate nonmetastatic prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2005. 23: 2918.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15860850
1015.Toussi, A., et al. Standardizing the Definition of Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy-What Prostate Specific Antigen Cut Point Best Predicts a Durable Increase and Subsequent Systemic Progression? J Urol, 2016. 195: 1754.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26721226
1016.Roach, M., 3rd, et al. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2006. 65: 965.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16798415
1017.Jackson, W.C., et al. Intermediate Endpoints After Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy: 5-Year Distant Metastasis to Predict Overall Survival. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 413.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29306514
1018.Choueiri, T.K., et al. Impact of postoperative prostate-specific antigen disease recurrence and the use of salvage therapy on the risk of death. Cancer, 2010. 116: 1887.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20162710
1019.Freiberger, C., et al. Long-term prognostic significance of rising PSA levels following radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer - focus on overall survival. Radiat Oncol, 2017. 12: 98.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28615058
1020.Royce, T.J., et al. Surrogate End Points for All-Cause Mortality in Men With Localized Unfavorable-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated With Radiation Therapy vs Radiation Therapy Plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2017. 3: 652.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28097317
1021.Tilki, D., et al. External Validation of the European Association of Urology Biochemical Recurrence Risk Groups to Predict Metastasis and Mortality After Radical Prostatectomy in a European Cohort. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 896.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30955970
1022.Zagars, G.K., et al. Kinetics of serum prostate-specific antigen after external beam radiation for clinically localized prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol, 1997. 44: 213.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9380819
1023.Rouviere, O., et al. Imaging of prostate cancer local recurrences: why and how? Eur Radiol, 2010. 20: 1254.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19921202
1024.Beresford, M.J., et al. A systematic review of the role of imaging before salvage radiotherapy for post-prostatectomy biochemical recurrence. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol), 2010. 22: 46.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19948393
1025.Gomez, P., et al. Radionuclide bone scintigraphy in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: when is it indicated? BJU Int, 2004. 94: 299.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15291855
1026.Kane, C.J., et al. Limited value of bone scintigraphy and computed tomography in assessing biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Urology, 2003. 61: 607.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12639656
1027.Beer, A.J., et al. Radionuclide and hybrid imaging of recurrent prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol, 2011. 12: 181.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20599424
1028.Beheshti, M., et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer by 18F fluorocholine and 18F fluoride PET-CT: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2008. 35: 1766.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18465129
1029.Yang, Y.Y., et al. Diagnostic performance of 18F-labeled PSMA PET/CT in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Radiol, 2023. 64: 2791.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37545168
1030.Mazzone, E., et al. The Role of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography for Assessment of Local Recurrence and Distant Metastases in Patients with Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Definitive Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2025. 88: 129.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40393864
1031.Morris, M.J., et al. Diagnostic Performance of (18)F-DCFPyL-PET/CT in Men with Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Results from the CONDOR Phase III, Multicenter Study. Clin Cancer Res, 2021. 27: 3674.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33622706
1032.Giesel, F.L., et al. Intraindividual Comparison of (18)F-PSMA-1007 and (18)F-DCFPyL PET/CT in the Prospective Evaluation of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Prostate Carcinoma: A Pilot Study. J Nucl Med, 2018. 59: 1076.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29269569
1033.Eiber, M., et al. Whole-body MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for patients with recurring prostate cancer: technical feasibility and assessment of lesion conspicuity in DWI. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2011. 33: 1160.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21509875
1034.Zacho, H.D., et al. Prospective comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT, (18)F-sodium fluoride PET/CT and diffusion weighted-MRI at for the detection of bone metastases in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2018. 45: 1884.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29876619
1035.Renard-Penna, R., et al. Targeting Local Recurrence After Surgery With MRI Imaging for Prostate Cancer in the Setting of Salvage Radiation Therapy. Front Oncol, 2022. 12: 775387.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35242702
1036.Song, W., et al. Prognostic factors after salvage radiotherapy alone in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol, 2016. 23: 56.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26502086
1037.Sharma, V., et al. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Is an Independent Predictor of Salvage Radiotherapy Outcomes After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 879.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29195777
1038.Farneti, A., et al. The Prognostic Value of DCE-MRI Findings before Salvage Radiotherapy after Radical Prostatectomy. Cancers (Basel), 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36831588
1039.Panebianco, V., et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR): International Consensus -based Guidelines on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Recurrence after Radiation Therapy and Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 868.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33582104
1040.Abreu-Gomez, J., et al. PI-RR: The Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting System for MRI Assessment of Local Prostate Cancer Recurrence After Radiation Therapy or Radical Prostatectomy-A Review. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2023. 220: 852.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36722763
1041.Franco, P.N., et al. An MRI assessment of prostate cancer local recurrence using the PI-RR system: diagnostic accuracy, inter-observer reliability among readers with variable experience, and correlation with PSA values. Eur Radiol, 2024. 34: 1790.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37646815
1042.Luiting, H.B., et al. Use of gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography for detecting lymph node metastases in primary and recurrent prostate cancer and location of recurrence after radical prostatectomy: an overview of the current literature. BJU Int, 2020. 125: 206.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31680398
1043.Boreta, L., et al. Location of Recurrence by Gallium-68 PSMA-11 PET Scan in Prostate Cancer Patients Eligible for Salvage Radiotherapy. Urology, 2019. 129: 165.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30928607
1044.Farolfi, A., et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and PSA <0.5 ng/ml. Efficacy and impact on treatment strategy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2019. 46: 11.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29905907
1045.Guberina, N., et al. Whole-Body Integrated [(68)Ga]PSMA-11-PET/MR Imaging in Patients with Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Whole-Body PET/CT as the Standard of Reference. Mol Imaging Biol, 2020. 22: 788.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31482413
1046.Metser, U., et al. The Contribution of Multiparametric Pelvic and Whole-Body MRI to Interpretation of (18)F-Fluoromethylcholine or (68)Ga-HBED-CC PSMA-11 PET/CT in Patients with Biochemical Failure After Radical Prostatectomy. J Nucl Med, 2019. 60: 1253.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30902875
1047.Freitag, M.T., et al. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy is at risk to be missed in (68)Ga-PSMA-11-PET of PET/CT and PET/MRI: comparison with mpMRI integrated in simultaneous PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2017. 44: 776.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27988802
1048.Dinis Fernandes, C., et al. Quantitative 3T multiparametric MRI of benign and malignant prostatic tissue in patients with and without local recurrent prostate cancer after external-beam radiation therapy. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019. 50: 269.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30585368
1049.Donati, O.F., et al. Multiparametric prostate MR imaging with T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences: are all pulse sequences necessary to detect locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy? Radiology, 2013. 268: 440.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23481164
1050.Dinis Fernandes, C., et al. Quantitative 3-T multi-parametric MRI and step-section pathology of recurrent prostate cancer patients after radiation therapy. Eur Radiol, 2019. 29: 4160.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30421016
1051.Perera, M., et al. Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictors of Positive (68)Ga-Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 926.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27363387
1052.Rasing, M., et al. Value of Targeted Biopsies and Combined PSMA PET/CT and mp-MRI Imaging in Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer after Primary Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel), 2022. 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35159048
1053.Menne Guricova, K., et al. Intra-prostatic recurrences after radiotherapy with focal boost: Location and dose mapping in the FLAME trial. Radiother Oncol, 2024. 201: 110535.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39278316
1054.Boorjian, S.A., et al. Radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy: impact on metastasis and survival. J Urol, 2009. 182: 2708.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19836762
1055.Kneebone, A., et al. A Phase III Multi-Centre Randomised Trial comparing adjuvant versus early salvage Radiotherapy following a Radical Prostatectomy: Results of the TROG 08.03 and ANZUP “RAVES” Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2019. 105: S37.
http://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(10)01144-2/abstract
1056.Tilki, D., et al. Salvage Radiotherapy versus Observation for Biochemical Recurrence following Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Matched Pair Analysis. Cancers (Basel), 2022. 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35159007
1057.Stish, B.J., et al. Improved Metastasis-Free and Survival Outcomes With Early Salvage Radiotherapy in Men With Detectable Prostate-Specific Antigen After Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 3864.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27480153
1058.Pfister, D., et al. Early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2014. 65: 1034.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23972524
1059.Ohri, N., et al. Can early implementation of salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer improve the therapeutic ratio? A systematic review and regression meta-analysis with radiobiological modelling. Eur J Cancer, 2012. 48: 837.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21945099
1060.Wiegel, T., et al. Achieving an undetectable PSA after radiotherapy for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy is an independent predictor of biochemical outcome--results of a retrospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2009. 73: 1009.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18963539
1061.Trock, B.J., et al. Prostate cancer-specific survival following salvage radiotherapy vs observation in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA, 2008. 299: 2760.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18560003
1062.Tilki, D., et al. Prostate-Specific Antigen Level at the Time of Salvage Therapy After Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer and the Risk of Death. J Clin Oncol, 2023. 41: 2428.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36857638
1063.Group, I.C.W., et al. The Development of Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate (ICECaP). J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015. 107: djv261.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26409187
1064.Xie, W., et al. Metastasis-Free Survival Is a Strong Surrogate of Overall Survival in Localized Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2017. 35: 3097.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28796587
1065.Lukka, H.R., et al. Long-Term Results of NRG/RTOG 9601, a Randomized Trial of Radiation With or Without Antiandrogens in Patients Receiving Salvage Prostate Bed Radiation Therapy Postprostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2025. 123: 990.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40752653
1066.Ramey, S.J., et al. Multi-institutional Evaluation of Elective Nodal Irradiation and/or Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Postprostatectomy Salvage Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 99.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29128208
1067.Parker, C.C., et al. Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2024. 403: 2405.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38763154
1068.Parker, C.C., et al. Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial. Lancet, 2024. 403: 2416.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38763153/
1069.Pollack, A., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy combined with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer management. Lancet, 2024. 403: 2353.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38763152
1070.Burdett, S., et al. Duration of Androgen Suppression with Postoperative Radiotherapy (DADSPORT) for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer: A Collaborative Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Aggregate Data. Eur Urol, 2025. 88: 277.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40571441
1071.Nabid, A., et al. Testosterone recovery after androgen deprivation therapy in localised prostate cancer: Long-term data from two randomised trials. Radiother Oncol, 2024. 195: 110256.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38552845
1072.Dess, R.T., et al. Association of Presalvage Radiotherapy PSA Levels After Prostatectomy With Outcomes of Long-term Antiandrogen Therapy in Men With Prostate Cancer. JAMA Oncol, 2020. 6: 735.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32215583
1073.Spratt, D.E., et al. A Systematic Review and Framework for the Use of Hormone Therapy with Salvage Radiation Therapy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 156.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28716370
1074.Malone, S., et al. Postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of four consensus guidelines and dosimetric evaluation of 3D-CRT versus tomotherapy IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2012. 84: 725.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22444999
1075.Dal Pra, A., et al. ESTRO ACROP guideline on prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol, 2023. 41: 100638.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37251620
1076.Pisansky, T.M., et al. Salvage Radiation Therapy Dose Response for Biochemical Failure of Prostate Cancer After Prostatectomy-A Multi-Institutional Observational Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2016. 96: 1046.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27745980
1077.King, C.R. The dose-response of salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol, 2016. 121: 199.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27863963
1078.Fossati, N., et al. Assessing the Optimal Timing for Early Salvage Radiation Therapy in Patients with Prostate-specific Antigen Rise After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 728.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26497924
1079.Fiorino, C., et al. Predicting the 5-Year Risk of Biochemical Relapse After Postprostatectomy Radiation Therapy in >/=PT2, pN0 Patients With a Comprehensive Tumor Control Probability Model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2016. 96: 333.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27497691
1080.Tendulkar, R.D., et al. Contemporary Update of a Multi-Institutional Predictive Nomogram for Salvage Radiotherapy After Radical Prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 3648.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27528718
1081.Ghadjar, P., et al. Dose-intensified Versus Conventional-dose Salvage Radiotherapy for Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Prostatectomy: The SAKK 09/10 Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 306.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34140144
1082.Li, H.Z., et al. Dose-Intensified Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Results From the PKUFH Randomized Phase 3 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2024. 118: 697.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37717784
1083.Ranta, K., et al. Severe Late Toxicities (Grade 3-5) With 13 Years of Follow-up after Hypofractionated Postprostatectomy Radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2025. 123: 374.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40222393
1084.Bartkowiak, D., et al. Prostate-specific antigen after salvage radiotherapy for postprostatectomy biochemical recurrence predicts long-term outcome including overall survival. Acta Oncol, 2018. 57: 362.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28816074
1085.Ghadjar, P., et al. Acute Toxicity and Quality of Life After Dose-Intensified Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Prostatectomy: First Results of the Randomized Trial SAKK 09/10. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 4158.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26527774
1086.Ghadjar, P., et al. Impact of dose intensified salvage radiation therapy on urinary continence recovery after radical prostatectomy: Results of the randomized trial SAKK 09/10. Radiother Oncol, 2018. 126: 257.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29103826
1087.Goenka, A., et al. Improved toxicity profile following high-dose postprostatectomy salvage radiation therapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Eur Urol, 2011. 60: 1142.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21855208
1088.Ost, P., et al. High-dose salvage intensity-modulated radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation after radical prostatectomy for rising or persisting prostate-specific antigen: 5-year results. Eur Urol, 2011. 60: 842.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21514039
1089.Qi, X., et al. Toxicity and Biochemical Outcomes of Dose-Intensified Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 106: 282.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31669564
1090.Jackson, W.C., et al. Combining prostate-specific antigen nadir and time to nadir allows for early identification of patients at highest risk for development of metastasis and death following salvage radiation therapy. Pract Radiat Oncol, 2014. 4: 99.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24890350
1091.Roach, P.J., et al. The Impact of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT on Management Intent in Prostate Cancer: Results of an Australian Prospective Multicenter Study. J Nucl Med, 2018. 59: 82.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28646014
1092.Rauscher, I., et al. Efficacy, Predictive Factors, and Prediction Nomograms for (68)Ga-labeled Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-ligand Positron-emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Early Biochemical Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 656.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29358059
1093.Meijer, D., et al. Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Is Associated with Improved Oncological Outcome in Men Treated with Salvage Radiation Therapy for Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 146.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35074282
1094.Scharl, S., et al. Salvage radiotherapy is effective in patients with PSMA-PET-negative biochemical recurrence- results of a retrospective study. Radiother Oncol, 2023. 184: 109678.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37146766
1095.Jani, A.B., et al. (18)F-fluciclovine-PET/CT imaging versus conventional imaging alone to guide postprostatectomy salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer (EMPIRE-1): a single centre, open-label, phase 2/3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2021. 397: 1895.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33971152
1096.Steuber, T., et al. Standard of Care Versus Metastases-directed Therapy for PET-detected Nodal Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer Following Multimodality Treatment: A Multi-institutional Case-control Study. Eur Urol Focus, 2019. 5: 1007.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29530632
1097.De Bleser, E., et al. Metastasis-directed Therapy in Treating Nodal Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A Multi-institutional Analysis Comparing the Outcome and Toxicity of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and Elective Nodal Radiotherapy. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 732.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31331782
1098.Yang, Y.J., et al. Salvage lymphadenectomy or radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence and PET positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and pooled analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2024. 50: 108704.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39326304
1099.Ost, P., et al. Salvage metastasis-directed therapy versus elective nodal radiotherapy for oligorecurrent nodal prostate cancer metastases (PEACE V-STORM): a phase 2, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol, 2025. 26: 695.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40339593
1100.Ost, P., et al. Surveillance or Metastasis-Directed Therapy for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer Recurrence: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Phase II Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2018. 36: 446.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29240541
1101.Ploussard, G., et al. Salvage Lymph Node Dissection for Nodal Recurrent Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 493.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30391078
1102.Bravi, C.A., et al. Long-term Outcomes of Salvage Lymph Node Dissection for Nodal Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy: Not as Good as Previously Thought. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 661.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32624288
1103.Rischke, H.C., et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy after salvage lymph node dissection because of nodal relapse of prostate cancer versus salvage lymph node dissection only. Strahlenther Onkol, 2015. 191: 310.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25326142
1104.Bravi, C.A., et al. Oncologic Outcomes of Template Versus Radioguided Salvage Lymph Node Dissection for Node-only Recurrent Prostate Cancer on Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography Scan: Results from a Multi-institutional Collaboration. Eur Urol Focus, 2025. 11: 921.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40830006
1105.Knipper, S., et al. Cohort Study of Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer Patients: Oncological Outcomes of Patients Treated with Salvage Lymph Node Dissection via Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-radioguided Surgery. Eur Urol, 2023. 83: 62.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35718637
1106.Valle, L.F., et al. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Local Salvage Therapies After Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer (MASTER). Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 280.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33309278
1107.Gontero, P., et al. Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Morbidity and Functional Outcomes from a Large Multicenter Series of Open versus Robotic Approaches. J Urol, 2019. 202: 725.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31075058
1108.Saouli, A., et al. Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review (French ccAFU). Cancers (Basel), 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38001745
1109.van Altena, E.J.E., et al. Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography Before Reaching the Phoenix Criteria for Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Radiotherapy: Earlier Detection of Recurrences. Eur Urol Oncol, 2025. 8: 417.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39414419
1110.Chade, D.C., et al. Cancer control and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for radiation-recurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol, 2012. 61: 961.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22280856
1111.Marra, G., et al. Oncological outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer in the contemporary era: A multicenter retrospective study. Urol Oncol, 2021. 39: 296 e21.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33436329
1112.Calleris, G., et al. Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following First-line Nonsurgical Treatment: Validation of the European Association of Urology Criteria in a Large, Multicenter, Contemporary Cohort. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 645.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36682962
1113.Thakker, P.U., et al. A Comprehensive Review of the Current State of Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Salvage Prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol, 2024. 50: 398.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38701186
1114.Preisser, F., et al. Oncologic Outcomes of Lymph Node Dissection at Salvage Radical Prostatectomy. Cancers (Basel), 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37370733
1115.Preisser, F., et al. Impact of persistent PSA after salvage radical prostatectomy: a multicenter study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024. 27: 686.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37803241
1116.Gotto, G.T., et al. Impact of prior prostate radiation on complications after radical prostatectomy. J Urol, 2010. 184: 136.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20478594
1117.Mandel, P., et al. Salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer: verification of European Association of Urology guideline criteria. BJU Int, 2016. 117: 55.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25711672
1118.Moschovas, M.C., et al. Outcomes of Salvage Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy in the last decade: systematic review and perspectives of referral centers. Int Braz J Urol, 2023. 49: 677.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37903005
1119.Zhu, S., et al. Oncological effects and complications of salvage cryotherapy for radio-recurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol, 2025. 15: 1534739.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40248202
1120.Ginsburg, K.B., et al. Avoidance of androgen deprivation therapy in radiorecurrent prostate cancer as a clinically meaningful endpoint for salvage cryoablation. Prostate, 2017. 77: 1446.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28856702
1121.Spiess, P.E., et al. A pretreatment nomogram predicting biochemical failure after salvage cryotherapy for locally recurrent prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2010. 106: 194.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19922545
1122.Campbell, S.P., et al. Salvage Cryoablation for Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following Primary External Beam Radiotherapy or Primary Cryotherapy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of Mid-term Oncologic and Functional Outcomes. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2023. 21: 555.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37438234
1123.Li, R., et al. The Effect of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Before Salvage Whole-gland Cryoablation After Primary Radiation Failure in Prostate Cancer Treatment. Urology, 2015. 85: 1137.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25799176
1124.Kovac, E., et al. Five-Year Biochemical Progression-Free Survival Following Salvage Whole-Gland Prostate Cryoablation: Defining Success with Nadir Prostate-Specific Antigen. J Endourol, 2016. 30: 624.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26915721
1125.Ahmad, I., et al. Prostate gland lengths and iceball dimensions predict micturition functional outcome following salvage prostate cryotherapy in men with radiation recurrent prostate cancer. PLoS One, 2013. 8: e69243.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23950886
1126.Pisters, L.L., et al. Salvage prostate cryoablation: initial results from the cryo on-line data registry. J Urol, 2008. 180: 559.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18554664
1127.Henriquez Lopez, I., et al. Salvage brachytherapy for locally-recurrent prostate cancer after radiation therapy: A comparison of efficacy and toxicity outcomes with high-dose rate and low-dose rate brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol, 2019. 141: 156.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31570236
1128.Crook, J.M., et al. A Prospective Phase 2 Trial of Transperineal Ultrasound-Guided Brachytherapy for Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer After External Beam Radiation Therapy (NRG Oncology/RTOG-0526). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2019. 103: 335.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30312717
1129.Smith, W.H., et al. Salvage low dose rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer recurrence following definitive external beam radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol, 2021. 155: 42.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33075391
1130.Lyczek, J., et al. HDR brachytherapy as a solution in recurrences of locally advanced prostate cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 2009. 1: 105.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27795720
1131.Pasquier, D., et al. Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Local Prostate Cancer Recurrence After Radiation Therapy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study of the GETUG. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2019. 105: 727.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31344433
1132.Fuller, D., et al. Retreatment for Local Recurrence of Prostatic Carcinoma After Prior Therapeutic Irradiation: Efficacy and Toxicity of HDR-Like SBRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 106: 291.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31629838
1133.Bergamin, S., et al. Interim Results of a Prospective Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Directed Focal Stereotactic Reirradiation Trial for Locally Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 108: 1172.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32659332
1134.Yang, J., et al. Nonsurgical salvage options for locally recurrent prostate cancer after primary definitive radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg, 2024. 110: 3008.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38348896
1135.Crouzet, S., et al. Salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for locally recurrent prostate cancer after failed radiation therapy: Multi-institutional analysis of 418 patients. BJU Int, 2017. 119: 896.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28063191
1136.Murat, F.J., et al. Mid-term results demonstrate salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) as an effective and acceptably morbid salvage treatment option for locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2009. 55: 640.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18508188
1137.Kanthabalan, A., et al. Focal salvage high-intensity focused ultrasound in radiorecurrent prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2017. 120: 246.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28258616
1138.Jones, T.A., et al. High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A North American Clinical Trial. J Urol, 2018. 199: 133.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28652121
1139.van den Bergh, R.C., et al. Role of Hormonal Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients with Nonmetastatic Disease Recurrence After Local Curative Treatment: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 802.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26691493
1140.Duchesne, G.M., et al. Timing of androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer with a rising PSA (TROG 03.06 and VCOG PR 01-03 [TOAD]): a randomised, multicentre, non-blinded, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2016. 17: 727.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27155740
1141.Siddiqui, S.A., et al. Timing of androgen deprivation therapy and its impact on survival after radical prostatectomy: a matched cohort study. J Urol, 2008. 179: 1830.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18353378
1142.Levine, G.N., et al. Androgen-deprivation therapy in prostate cancer and cardiovascular risk: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and American Urological Association: endorsed by the American Society for Radiation Oncology. Circulation, 2010. 121: 833.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20124128
1143.O'Farrell, S., et al. Risk and timing of cardiovascular disease after androgen-deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 1243.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25732167
1144.Boorjian, S.A., et al. Long-term risk of clinical progression after biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy: the impact of time from surgery to recurrence. Eur Urol, 2011. 59: 893.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21388736
1145.Freedland, S.J., et al. Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer. N Eng J Med, 2023. 389: 1453.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37851874/
1146.U.S. Food & Drug Adminstration. FDA approves enzalutamide for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. 2019. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-enzalutamide-metastatic-castration-sensitive-prostate-cancer
1147.European Medicines Agency. CHMP positive opinion for enxalutamide (XTANDI™) for non-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer with high-risk biochemical recurrence. . 2024. 2025.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/xtandi-enzalutamide-new-indication
1148.Aparicio, A. Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer — Tilting the Scale. N Eng J Med, 2023. 389: 1522.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37851879/
1149.Josefsson, A., et al. Effect of docetaxel added to bicalutamide in Hormone-Naïve non-metastatic prostate cancer with rising PSA, a randomized clinical trial (SPCG-14). Acta Oncol, 2023. 62: 372.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37073813
1150.Bubley, G.J. Is the flare phenomenon clinically significant? Urology, 2001. 58: 5.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11502435
1151.Krakowsky, Y., et al. Risk of Testosterone Flare in the Era of the Saturation Model: One More Historical Myth. Eur Urol Focus, 2019. 5: 81.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28753828
1152.Vis, A.N., et al. Risk of disease flare with LHRH agonist therapy in men with prostate cancer: myth or fact? Urol Oncol, 2015. 33: 7.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25159013
1153.Klotz, L., et al. The efficacy and safety of degarelix: a 12-month, comparative, randomized, open-label, parallel-group phase III study in patients with prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2008. 102: 1531.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19035858
1154.Seidenfeld, J., et al. Single-therapy androgen suppression in men with advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med, 2000. 132: 566.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10744594
1155.Ostergren, P.B., et al. Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone Agonists are Superior to Subcapsular Orchiectomy in Lowering Testosterone Levels of Men with Prostate Cancer: Results from a Randomized Clinical Trial. J Urol, 2017. 197: 1441.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27939836
1156.Shore, N.D. Experience with degarelix in the treatment of prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol, 2013. 5: 11.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23372607
1157.Sciarra, A., et al. A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials with degarelix versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists for advanced prostate cancer. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016. 95: e3845.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27399062
1158.Cirne, F., et al. The cardiovascular effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists in men with prostate cancer. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother, 2022. 8: 253.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33470403
1159.Abufaraj, M., et al. Differential Impact of Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Antagonist Versus Agonist on Clinical Safety and Oncologic Outcomes on Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Eur Urol, 2021. 79: 44.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32605859
1160.Shore, N.D., et al. Oral Relugolix for Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Advanced Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2020. 382: 2187.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32469183
1161.U.S. Food & Drug Adminstration. FDA approves relugolix for advanced prostate cancer. 2020. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-relugolix-advanced-prostate-cancer
1162.European Medicines Agency. Orgovyx approved for advanced prostate cancer. 2022. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/orgovyx
1163.Moffat, L.E. Comparison of Zoladex, diethylstilbestrol and cyproterone acetate treatment in advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 1990. 18 Suppl 3: 26.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2151272
1164.Schroder, F.H., et al. Metastatic prostate cancer treated by flutamide versus cyproterone acetate. Final analysis of the "European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer" (EORTC) Protocol 30892. Eur Urol, 2004. 45: 457.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15041109
1165.Smith, M.R., et al. Bicalutamide monotherapy versus leuprolide monotherapy for prostate cancer: effects on bone mineral density and body composition. J Clin Oncol, 2004. 22: 2546.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15226323
1166.Iversen, P. Antiandrogen monotherapy: indications and results. Urology, 2002. 60: 64.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12231053
1167.Wadhwa, V.K., et al. Long-term changes in bone mineral density and predicted fracture risk in patients receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer, with stratification of treatment based on presenting values. BJU Int, 2009. 104: 800.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19338564
1168.Montgomery, R.B., et al. Maintenance of intratumoral androgens in metastatic prostate cancer: a mechanism for castration-resistant tumor growth. Cancer Res, 2008. 68: 4447.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18519708
1169.European Medicines Agency. Nubeqa (darolutamide). 2020. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/nubeqa
1170.European Medicines Agency. Xtandi (enzalutamide). 2013. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/xtandi
1171.Chi, K.N., et al. Apalutamide for Metastatic, Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2019. 381: 13.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31150574
1172.Armstrong, A.J., et al. ARCHES: A Randomized, Phase III Study of Androgen Deprivation Therapy With Enzalutamide or Placebo in Men With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2019. 37: 2974.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31329516
1173.Fizazi, K., et al. Abiraterone plus Prednisone in Metastatic, Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2017. 377: 352.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28578607
1174.Saad, F., et al. Darolutamide in Combination With Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer From the Phase III ARANOTE Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2024. 42: 4271.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39279580
1175.U.S. Food & Drug Administration. FDA approves abiraterone acetate in combination with prednisone for high-risk metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. 2018. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-abiraterone-acetate-combination-prednisone-high-risk-metastatic-castration-sensitive
1176.U.S. Food & Drug Administration. FDA approves apalutamide for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. 2019. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-apalutamide-metastatic-castration-sensitive-prostate-cancer
1177.European Medicines Agency. Zytiga. 2011. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/zytiga#:~:text=The%20European%20Medicines%20Agency%20decided,improve%20survival%20compared%20with%20placebo.
1178.European Medicines Agency. Erleada (apalutamide). 2019. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/erleada
1179.Keam, S.J. Rezvilutamide: First Approval. Drugs, 2023. 83: 189.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36630077
1180.Moilanen, A.M., et al. Discovery of ODM-201, a new-generation androgen receptor inhibitor targeting resistance mechanisms to androgen signaling-directed prostate cancer therapies. Sci Rep, 2015. 5: 12007.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26137992
1181.Zurth, C., et al. Blood-brain barrier penetration of [14C]darolutamide compared with [14C]enzalutamide in rats using whole body autoradiography. J Clin Oncol 2018. 36: 345.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.6_suppl.345
1182.Sousa-Pimenta, M., et al. Chemotherapeutic properties and side-effects associated with the clinical practice of terpene alkaloids: paclitaxel, docetaxel, and cabazitaxel. Front Pharmacol, 2023. 14: 1157306.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37229270
1183.Xue, B., et al. Synthesis of Taxol and Docetaxel by Using 10-Deacetyl-7-xylosyltaxanes. Chem Biodivers, 2020. 17: e1900631.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31967396
1184.Geng, C.X., et al. Docetaxel inhibits SMMC-7721 human hepatocellular carcinoma cells growth and induces apoptosis. World J Gastroenterol, 2003. 9: 696.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12679913
1185.Lord, C.J., et al. PARP inhibitors: Synthetic lethality in the clinic. Science, 2017. 355: 1152.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28302823
1186.Hargadon, K.M., et al. Immune checkpoint blockade therapy for cancer: An overview of FDA-approved immune checkpoint inhibitors. Int Immunopharmacol, 2018. 62: 29.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29990692
1187.Le, D.T., et al. PD-1 Blockade in Tumors with Mismatch-Repair Deficiency. N Engl J Med, 2015. 372: 2509.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26028255
1188.Sgouros, G., et al. Radiopharmaceutical therapy in cancer: clinical advances and challenges. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2020. 19: 589.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32728208
1189.US Food & Drug Adminstration. FDA approval of Pluvicto (lutetium Lu 177 vipivotide tetraxetan) for the treatment of adult patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have been treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibition and taxane-based chemotherapy. 2022. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-disco-burst-edition-fda-approval-pluvicto-lutetium-lu-177-vipivotide-tetraxetan-treatment-adult
1190.European Medicines Agency. Summary of product characteristics - Pluvicto 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/pluvicto-epar-product-information_en.pdf
1191.Yu, E.Y., et al. Germline and Somatic Genomic Testing for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: ASCO Guideline. J Clin Oncol, 2025. 43: 748.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39787437
1192.Grist, E., et al. Tumor transcriptome-wide expression classifiers predict treatment sensitivity in advanced prostate cancers. Cell, 2025. 188: 5717.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40865526
1193.Dienstmann, R., et al. Standardized decision support in next generation sequencing reports of somatic cancer variants. Mol Oncol, 2014. 8: 859.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24768039
1194.Beer, T.M., et al. Enzalutamide in Men with Chemotherapy-naive Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Extended Analysis of the Phase 3 PREVAIL Study. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 151.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27477525
1195.Lotan, T.L., et al. Report From the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consultation Conference on Molecular Pathology of Urogenital Cancers. I. Molecular Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer. Am J Surg Pathol, 2020. 44: e15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32044806
1196.Hussain, M., et al. PROfound: Phase III study of olaparib versus enzalutamide or abiraterone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations. Annals of Oncology, 2019. 30: v881.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0923753419603996
1197.Hussain, M., et al. Survival with Olaparib in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2020. 383: 2345.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32955174
1198.Clarke, N.W., et al. Abiraterone and Olaparib for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. NEJM Evidence, 2022. 1: EVIDoa2200043.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38319800/
1199.Saad, F., et al. Olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PROpel): final prespecified overall survival results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2023. 24: 1094.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37714168
1200.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA approves olaparib with abiraterone and prednisone (or prednisolone) for BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. 2023.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/fda-approves-olaparib-abiraterone-and-prednisone-or-prednisolone-brca-mutated-metastatic-castration
1201.U.S. Food & Drug Adminstration. FDA D.I.S.C.O. Burst Edition: FDA approval of Lynparza (olaparib), with abiraterone and prednisone, for BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. 2023.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-disco-burst-edition-fda-approval-lynparza-olaparib-abiraterone-and-prednisone-brca-mutated#:~:text=On%20May%2031%2C%202023%2C%20the,FDA%2Dapproved%20companion%20diagnostic%20test.
1202.Chi, K.N., et al. Phase 3 MAGNITUDE study: First results of niraparib (NIRA) with abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) as first-line therapy in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with and without homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations. J Clin Oncol, 2022. 40: 12.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.6_suppl.012
1203.Chi, K.N., et al. Niraparib plus abiraterone acetate with prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and homologous recombination repair gene alterations: second interim analysis of the randomized phase III MAGNITUDE trial. Ann Oncol, 2023. 34: 772.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37399894
1204.European Medicines Agency. Akeega. 2023.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/akeega
1205.Agarwal, N., et al. Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in men with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TALAPRO-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet, 2023. 402: 291.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37285865
1206.Fizazi, K., et al. First-line talazoparib with enzalutamide in HRR-deficient metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the phase 3 TALAPRO-2 trial. Nat Med, 2024.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38049622/
1207.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA approves talazoparib with enzalutamide for HRR gene-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. 2023.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/fda-approves-talazoparib-enzalutamide-hrr-gene-mutated-metastatic-castration-resistant-prostate
1208.U.S. Food and Drug Adminstration. pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA). 2016. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-cancer-treatment-any-solid-tumor-specific-genetic-feature
1209.Napoli, G., et al. A Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials' Control Groups in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (mHSPC). Curr Oncol Rep, 2022. 24: 1633.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35953601
1210.Glass, T.R., et al. Metastatic carcinoma of the prostate: identifying prognostic groups using recursive partitioning. J Urol, 2003. 169: 164.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12478127
1211.Gravis, G., et al. Prognostic Factors for Survival in Noncastrate Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Validation of the Glass Model and Development of a Novel Simplified Prognostic Model. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 196.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25277272
1212.Gravis, G., et al. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) Plus Docetaxel Versus ADT Alone in Metastatic Non castrate Prostate Cancer: Impact of Metastatic Burden and Long-term Survival Analysis of the Randomized Phase 3 GETUG-AFU15 Trial. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 256.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26610858
1213.Sweeney, C.J., et al. Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2015. 373: 737.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26244877
1214.Kyriakopoulos, C.E., et al. Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Analysis of the Randomized Phase III E3805 CHAARTED Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2018. 36: 1080.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29384722
1215.Gravis, G., et al. Burden of Metastatic Castrate Naive Prostate Cancer Patients, to Identify Men More Likely to Benefit from Early Docetaxel: Further Analyses of CHAARTED and GETUG-AFU15 Studies. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 847.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29475737
1216.Parker, C.C., et al. Radiotherapy to the primary tumour for newly diagnosed, metastatic prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet, 2018. 392: 2353.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30355464
1217.Francini, E., et al. Time of metastatic disease presentation and volume of disease are prognostic for metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Prostate, 2018. 78: 889.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29707790
1218.Hussain, M., et al. Absolute prostate-specific antigen value after androgen deprivation is a strong independent predictor of survival in new metastatic prostate cancer: data from Southwest Oncology Group Trial 9346 (INT-0162). J Clin Oncol, 2006. 24: 3984.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16921051
1219.Harshman, L.C., et al. Seven-Month Prostate-Specific Antigen Is Prognostic in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treated With Androgen Deprivation With or Without Docetaxel. J Clin Oncol, 2018. 36: 376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29261442
1220.Matsubara, N., et al. Correlation of Prostate-specific Antigen Kinetics with Overall Survival and Radiological Progression-free Survival in Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer Treated with Abiraterone Acetate plus Prednisone or Placebos Added to Androgen Deprivation Therapy: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3 LATITUDE Study. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 494.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31843335
1221.Chowdhury, S., et al. Deep, rapid, and durable prostate-specific antigen decline with apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy is associated with longer survival and improved clinical outcomes in TITAN patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Ann Oncol, 2023. 34: 477.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36858151
1222.Miszczyk, M., et al. Prostate-specific Antigen Response as a Prognostic Factor for Overall Survival in Patients with Prostate Cancer Treated with Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40379533
1223.Pagliarulo, V., et al. Contemporary role of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2012. 61: 11.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21871711
1224.Davey, P., et al. Cardiovascular risk profiles of GnRH agonists and antagonists: real-world analysis from UK general practice. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 307.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32979057
1225.Boland, J., et al. Cardiovascular Toxicity of Androgen Deprivation Therapy. Curr Cardiol Rep, 2021. 23: 109.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34216282
1226.Gu, L., et al. Adverse cardiovascular effect following gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus GnRH agonist for prostate cancer treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne), 2023. 14: 1157857.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37065739
1227.Kunath, F., et al. Non-steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy compared with luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists or surgical castration monotherapy for advanced prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2014. 6: CD009266.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24979481
1228.Niraula, S., et al. Treatment of prostate cancer with intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation: a systematic review of randomized trials. J Clin Oncol, 2013. 31: 2029.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23630216
1229.Botrel, T.E., et al. Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation for locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Urol, 2014. 14: 9.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24460605
1230.Tsai, H.T., et al. Efficacy of intermittent androgen deprivation therapy vs conventional continuous androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Urology, 2013. 82: 327.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23896094
1231.Brungs, D., et al. Intermittent androgen deprivation is a rational standard-of-care treatment for all stages of progressive prostate cancer: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2014. 17: 105.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24686773
1232.Magnan, S., et al. Intermittent vs Continuous Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol, 2015. 1: 1261.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26378418
1233.Hussain, M., et al. Intermittent versus continuous androgen deprivation in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2013. 368: 1314.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23550669
1234.Kunath, F., et al. Early versus deferred standard androgen suppression therapy for advanced hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019. 6: CD003506.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31194882
1235.Antonarakis, E.S., et al. Current Treatment Paradigms and Clinical Outcomes in Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer Patients: A Targeted Literature Review. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 1280.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38964996
1236.Maximum androgen blockade in advanced prostate cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Prostate Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Lancet, 2000. 355: 1491.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10801170
1237.Schmitt, B., et al. Maximal androgen blockade for advanced prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2000: CD001526.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10796804
1238.Davis, I.D., et al. Enzalutamide with Standard First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2019. 381: 121.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31157964
1239.Gu, W., et al. Rezvilutamide versus bicalutamide in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with high-volume, metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (CHART): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2022. 23: 1249.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36075260
1240.James, N.D., et al. Abiraterone for Prostate Cancer Not Previously Treated with Hormone Therapy. N Engl J Med, 2017. 377: 338.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28578639
1241.Rydzewska, L.H.M., et al. Adding abiraterone to androgen deprivation therapy in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer, 2017. 84: 88.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28800492
1242.Hoyle, A.P., et al. Abiraterone in "High-" and "Low-risk" Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 719.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31447077
1243.Armstrong, A.J., et al. Improved Survival With Enzalutamide in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2022. 40: 1616.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35420921
1244.Sweeney, C.J., et al. Testosterone suppression plus enzalutamide versus testosterone suppression plus standard antiandrogen therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (ENZAMET): an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2023. 24: 323.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36990608
1245.Chi, K.N., et al. Apalutamide in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Final Survival Analysis of the Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III TITAN Study. J Clin Oncol, 2021. 39: 2294.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33914595
1246.Fukuokaya, W., et al. Radiographic Progression Without Corresponding Prostate-specific Antigen Progression in Patients with Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer Receiving Apalutamide: Secondary Analysis of the TITAN Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38688767
1247.Wang, H., et al. Patient-reported outcomes of rezvilutamide versus bicalutamide in combination with androgen deprivation therapy in high-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients (CHART): a randomized, phase 3 study. Signal Transduct Target Ther, 2024. 9: 351.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39690158
1248.Sweeney, C.J., et al. Overall Survival of Men with Metachronous Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer Treated with Enzalutamide and Androgen Deprivation Therapy. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 275.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34030924
1249.Merseburger, A.S., et al. Apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy in clinical subgroups of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: A subgroup analysis of the randomised clinical TITAN study. Eur J Cancer, 2023. 193: 113290.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37708629
1250.Gravis, G., et al. Androgen-deprivation therapy alone or with docetaxel in non-castrate metastatic prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 15): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2013. 14: 149.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23306100
1251.Smith, T.J., et al. Recommendations for the Use of WBC Growth Factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 3199.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26169616
1252.Sathianathen, N.J., et al. Taxane-based chemohormonal therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018. 10: CD012816.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30320443
1253.Clarke, N.W., et al. Addition of docetaxel to hormonal therapy in low- and high-burden metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer: long-term survival results from the STAMPEDE trial. Ann Oncol, 2019. 30: 1992.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31560068
1254.Vale, C.L., et al. Which patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer benefit from docetaxel: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials. Lancet Oncol, 2023. 24: 783.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37414011
1255.Fizazi, K., et al. Abiraterone plus prednisone added to androgen deprivation therapy and docetaxel in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (PEACE-1): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Lancet, 2022. 399: 1695.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35405085
1256.Fizazi, K., et al. A phase 3 trial with a 2x2 factorial design of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone and/or local radiotherapy in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC): First results of PEACE-1. J Clin Oncol 2021. 39: 5000.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.5000
1257.Smith, M.R., et al. Darolutamide and Survival in Metastatic, Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2022. 386: 1132.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35179323
1258.Hussain, M., et al. Darolutamide Plus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer by Disease Volume and Risk Subgroups in the Phase III ARASENS Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2023. 41: 3595.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36795843
1259.Attard, G., et al. Niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone for HRR-deficient metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial. Nat Med, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/41057655
1260.Fizazi, K., et al. Capivasertib plus abiraterone in PTEN-deficient metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: CAPItello-281 phase III study. Ann Oncol, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/41120017
1261.Riaz, I.B., et al. First-line Systemic Treatment Options for Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol, 2023. 9: 635.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36862387
1262.Chen, X., et al. Comparative efficacy of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors for treating prostate cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne), 2023. 14: 1134719.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36967752
1263.Fallara, G., et al. Chemotherapy and advanced androgen blockage, alone or combined, for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev, 2022. 110: 102441.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35939976
1264.Hoeh, B., et al. Triplet or Doublet Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Updated Network Meta-analysis Stratified by Disease Volume. Eur Urol Focus, 2023. 9: 838.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37055323
1265.Ramos-Esquivel, A., et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on overall survival, failure-free survival and safety outcomes in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with new anti-androgens. Anticancer Drugs, 2023. 34: 405.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36730553
1266.Rajwa, P., et al. Association between age and efficacy of combination systemic therapies in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2023. 26: 170.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36284192
1267.Xiao, S., et al. Efficacy and safety of androgen receptor inhibitors for treatment of advanced prostate cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 2024. 90: 2067.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38992964
1268.Azad, A.A., et al. Combination Therapies in Locally Advanced and Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 455.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39947976
1269.Hoeh, B., et al. Triplet or Doublet Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer Patients: An Updated Network Meta-analysis Including ARANOTE Data. Eur Urol Focus, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39643549
1270.Hussain, M., et al. Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer and Combination Treatment Outcomes: A Review. JAMA Oncol, 2024. 10: 807.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38722620
1271.Boeve, L.M.S., et al. Effect on Survival of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Alone Compared to Androgen Deprivation Therapy Combined with Concurrent Radiation Therapy to the Prostate in Patients with Primary Bone Metastatic Prostate Cancer in a Prospective Randomised Clinical Trial: Data from the HORRAD Trial. Eur Urol, 2019. 75: 410.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30266309
1272.Parker, C.C., et al. Radiotherapy to the prostate for men with metastatic prostate cancer in the UK and Switzerland: Long-term results from the STAMPEDE randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med, 2022. 19: e1003998.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35671327
1273.Ali, A., et al. Association of Bone Metastatic Burden With Survival Benefit From Prostate Radiotherapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 555.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33599706
1274.Burdett, S., et al. Prostate Radiotherapy for Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A STOPCAP Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2019. 76: 115.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30826218
1275.Bossi, A., et al. Efficacy and safety of prostate radiotherapy in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (PEACE-1): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Lancet, 2024. 404: 2065.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39580202
1276.Roy, S., et al. Prostate Radiotherapy in Low-volume Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 10.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38570246
1277.Milenkovic, U., et al. Predictors of Recurrence After Metastasis-directed Therapy in Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer Following Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 582.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36878753
1278.Phillips, R., et al. Outcomes of Observation vs Stereotactic Ablative Radiation for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: The ORIOLE Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2020. 6: 650.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32215577
1279.Deek, M.P., et al. Long-Term Outcomes and Genetic Predictors of Response to Metastasis-Directed Therapy Versus Observation in Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: Analysis of STOMP and ORIOLE Trials. J Clin Oncol, 2022. 40: 3377.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36001857
1280.Glicksman, R.M., et al. Curative-intent Metastasis-directed Therapies for Molecularly-defined Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Phase II Trial Testing the Oligometastasis Hypothesis. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 374.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33685838
1281.Tang, C., et al. Addition of Metastasis-Directed Therapy to Intermittent Hormone Therapy for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: The EXTEND Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2023. 9: 825.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37022702
1282.Nikitas, J., et al. Systemic and Tumor-directed Therapy for Oligorecurrent Metastatic Prostate Cancer (SATURN): Primary Endpoint Results from a Phase 2 Clinical Trial. Eur Urol, 2024. 85: 517.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38494380/
1283.See, A.W., et al. Five-year outcomes of fractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer from the TRANSFORM phase II trial. Int J Cancer, 2024. 155: 1248.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38898626
1284.Marvaso, G., et al. ADT with SBRT versus SBRT alone for hormone-sensitive oligorecurrent prostate cancer (RADIOSA): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 clinical trial. Lancet Oncol, 2025. 26: 300.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40049196
1285.Battaglia, A., et al. Novel Insights into the Management of Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Review. Eur Urol Oncol, 2019. 2: 174.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31017094
1286.Connor, M.J., et al. Targeting Oligometastasis with Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy or Surgery in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of Prospective Clinical Trials. Eur Urol Oncol, 2020. 3: 582.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32891600
1287.Marvaso, G., et al. Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: Where Are We Now? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Eur Urol Open Sci, 2021. 27: 19.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34337513
1288.Devos, G., et al. Oncological Outcomes of Metastasis-Directed Therapy in Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy. Cancers (Basel), 2020. 12.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32823690
1289.Miszczyk, M., et al. The Efficacy and Safety of Metastasis-directed Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Eur Urol, 2024. 85: 125.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945451
1290.Scher, H.I., et al. Trial Design and Objectives for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Updated Recommendations From the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 1402.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26903579
1291.Eisenhauer, E.A., et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer, 2009. 45: 228.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19097774
1292.U.S. Food and Drug Adminstration. FDA approves liquid biopsy NGS companion diagnostic test for multiple cancers and biomarkers. 2020. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-liquid-biopsy-ngs-companion-diagnostic-test-multiple-cancers-and-biomarkers
1293.de Wit, R., et al. Cabazitaxel versus Abiraterone or Enzalutamide in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2019. 381: 2506.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31566937
1294.Loriot, Y., et al. Prior long response to androgen deprivation predicts response to next-generation androgen receptor axis targeted drugs in castration resistant prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer, 2015. 51: 1946.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26208462
1295.de Bono, J.S., et al. Antitumour Activity and Safety of Enzalutamide in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Previously Treated with Abiraterone Acetate Plus Prednisone for >/=24 weeks in Europe. Eur Urol, 2018. 74: 37.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28844372
1296.Heiss, B.L., et al. US Food and Drug Administration Approval Summary: Talazoparib in Combination With Enzalutamide for Treatment of Patients With Homologous Recombination Repair Gene-Mutated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2024. 42: 1851.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38452327
1297.Fallah, J., et al. FDA Approval Summary: Olaparib in Combination With Abiraterone for Treatment of Patients With BRCA-Mutated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2024. 42: 605.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38127780
1298.Fallah, J., et al. Efficacy of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors by Individual Genes in Homologous Recombination Repair Gene-Mutated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A US Food and Drug Administration Pooled Analysis. J Clin Oncol, 2024. 42: 1687.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38484203
1299.Fizazi, K., et al. Rucaparib or Physician's Choice in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2023. 388: 719.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36795891
1300.Smith, M.R., et al. Disease and host characteristics as predictors of time to first bone metastasis and death in men with progressive castration-resistant nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Cancer, 2011. 117: 2077.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21523719
1301.Crawford, E.D., et al. Challenges and recommendations for early identification of metastatic disease in prostate cancer. Urology, 2014. 83: 664.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24411213
1302.Fendler, W.P., et al. Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography in Men with Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. Clin Cancer Res, 2019. 25: 7448.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31511295
1303.Hussain, M., et al. Enzalutamide in Men with Nonmetastatic, Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2018. 378: 2465.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29949494
1304.Smith, M.R., et al. Apalutamide Treatment and Metastasis-free Survival in Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2018. 378: 1408.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29420164
1305.Fizazi, K., et al. Darolutamide in Nonmetastatic, Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2019. 380: 1235.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30763142
1306.Hussain, M., et al. Effects of continued androgen-deprivation therapy and other prognostic factors on response and survival in phase II chemotherapy trials for hormone-refractory prostate cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group report. J Clin Oncol, 1994. 12: 1868.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8083710
1307.Taylor, C.D., et al. Importance of continued testicular suppression in hormone-refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 1993. 11: 2167.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8229130
1308.Ryan, C.J., et al. Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy. N Engl J Med, 2013. 368: 138.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23228172
1309.Ryan, C.J., et al. Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (COU-AA-302): final overall survival analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol, 2015. 16: 152.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25601341
1310.Roviello, G., et al. Targeting the androgenic pathway in elderly patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016. 95: e4636.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27787354
1311.Beer, T.M., et al. Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy. N Engl J Med, 2014. 371: 424.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24881730
1312.Graff, J.N., et al. Efficacy and safety of enzalutamide in patients 75 years or older with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from PREVAIL. Ann Oncol, 2016. 27: 286.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26578735
1313.Evans, C.P., et al. The PREVAIL Study: Primary Outcomes by Site and Extent of Baseline Disease for Enzalutamide-treated Men with Chemotherapy-naive Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2016. 70: 675.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27006332
1314.Shore, N.D., et al. Efficacy and safety of enzalutamide versus bicalutamide for patients with metastatic prostate cancer (TERRAIN): a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol, 2016. 17: 153.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26774508
1315.de Bono, J.S., et al. Subsequent Chemotherapy and Treatment Patterns After Abiraterone Acetate in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Post Hoc Analysis of COU-AA-302. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 656.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27402060
1316.Tannock, I.F., et al. Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2004. 351: 1502.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15470213
1317.Berthold, D.R., et al. Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer: updated survival in the TAX 327 study. J Clin Oncol, 2008. 26: 242.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18182665
1318.Armstrong, A.J., et al. Prediction of survival following first-line chemotherapy in men with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res, 2010. 16: 203.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20008841
1319.Italiano, A., et al. Docetaxel-based chemotherapy in elderly patients (age 75 and older) with castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2009. 55: 1368.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18706755
1320.Horgan, A.M., et al. Tolerability and efficacy of docetaxel in older men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the TAX 327 trial. J Geriatr Oncol, 2014. 5: 119.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24495703
1321.Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, P.L., et al. 2-Weekly versus 3-weekly docetaxel to treat castration-resistant advanced prostate cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2013. 14: 117.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23294853
1322.Petrylak, D.P., et al. Pembrolizumab Plus Docetaxel Versus Docetaxel for Previously Treated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: The Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III KEYNOTE-921 Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2025. 43: 1638.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40043230
1323.Hussain, M., et al. Abiraterone, Olaparib, or Abiraterone + Olaparib in First-Line Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer with DNA Repair Defects (BRCAAway). Clin Cancer Res, 2024. 30: 4318.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39115414
1324.Chi, K.N., et al. Niraparib and Abiraterone Acetate plus Prednisone in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Final Overall Survival Analysis for the Phase 3 MAGNITUDE Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2025. 8: 986.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40328571
1325.Agarwal, N., et al. Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: final overall survival results from the randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 TALAPRO-2 trial. Lancet, 2025. 406: 447.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40683290
1326.Fizazi, K., et al. Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in men with HRR-deficient metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: final overall survival results from the randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 TALAPRO-2 trial. Lancet, 2025. 406: 461.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40683287
1327.Fizazi, K., et al. First-line talazoparib with enzalutamide in HRR-deficient metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the phase 3 TALAPRO-2 trial. Nat Med, 2024. 30: 257.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38049622
1328.Sava, J. ODAC Rejects Label Expansion for Talazoparib in Non-HRRm mCRPC. Targeted Oncology, 2025.
https://www.targetedonc.com/view/odac-rejects-label-expansion-for-talazoparib-in-non-hrrm-mcrpc
1329.European Medicines Agency. Talzenna - opinion on variation to marketing authorisation. 2023.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/variation/talzenna
1330.Yazgan, S.C., et al. Thromboembolic risk in prostate cancer patients treated with PARP inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2024. 198: 104376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38685459
1331.Morice, P.M., et al. Myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukaemia in patients treated with PARP inhibitors: a safety meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and a retrospective study of the WHO pharmacovigilance database. Lancet Haematol, 2021. 8: e122.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33347814
1332.Tombal, B., et al. Enzalutamide plus radium-223 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results of the EORTC 1333/PEACE-3 trial. Ann Oncol, 2025. 36: 1058.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40450503
1333.Gillessen, S., et al. Decrease in Fracture Rate with Mandatory Bone-protecting Agents in the EORTC 1333/PEACE-3 Trial Comparing Radium-223 Combined with Enzalutamide Versus Enzalutamide Alone: A Safety Analysis. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 285.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39827019
1334.de Bono, J.S., et al. Prednisone plus cabazitaxel or mitoxantrone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel treatment: a randomised open-label trial. Lancet, 2010. 376: 1147.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20888992
1335.Sartor, A., et al. Cabazitaxel vs docetaxel in chemotherapy-naive (CN) patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): A three-arm phase III study (FIRSTANA). J Clin Oncol 2016. 34: Abstract 5006.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.5006
1336.Eisenberger, M., et al. Phase III Study Comparing a Reduced Dose of Cabazitaxel (20 mg/m(2)) and the Currently Approved Dose (25 mg/m(2)) in Postdocetaxel Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer-PROSELICA. J Clin Oncol, 2017. 35: 3198.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28809610
1337.Di Lorenzo, G., et al. Peg-filgrastim and cabazitaxel in prostate cancer patients. Anticancer Drugs, 2013. 24: 84.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23044721
1338.de Bono, J.S., et al. Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2011. 364: 1995.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21612468
1339.Fizazi, K., et al. Abiraterone acetate for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: final overall survival analysis of the COU-AA-301 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol, 2012. 13: 983.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22995653
1340.Scher, H.I., et al. Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N Engl J Med, 2012. 367: 1187.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22894553
1341.Parker, C., et al. Alpha emitter radium-223 and survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2013. 369: 213.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23863050
1342.Hoskin, P., et al. Efficacy and safety of radium-223 dichloride in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, with or without previous docetaxel use: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial. Lancet Oncol, 2014. 15: 1397.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25439694
1343.European Medicines Agency. EMA restricts use of prostate cancer medicine Xofigo. 2018. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-restricts-use-prostate-cancer-medicine-xofigo
1344.Smith, M., et al. Addition of radium-223 to abiraterone acetate and prednisone or prednisolone in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases (ERA 223): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 408.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30738780
1345.Bryce, A.H., et al. Rucaparib for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): TRITON3 interim overall survival and efficacy of rucaparib vs docetaxel or second-generation androgen pathway inhibitor therapy. J Clin Oncol 2023. 41: 18.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2023.41.6_suppl.18
1346.Morris, M.J., et al. (177)Lu-PSMA-617 versus a change of androgen receptor pathway inhibitor therapy for taxane-naive patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PSMAfore): a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet, 2024. 404: 1227.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39293462
1347.Fizazi, K., et al. Final overall survival and safety analyses of the phase III PSMAfore trial of [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus change of androgen receptor pathway inhibitor in taxane-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Ann Oncol, 2025. 36: 1319.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40680993
1348.Rubin, K.H., et al. Comparison of different screening tools (FRAX(R), OST, ORAI, OSIRIS, SCORE and age alone) to identify women with increased risk of fracture. A population-based prospective study. Bone, 2013. 56: 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23669650
1349.Conde, F.A., et al. Risk factors for male osteoporosis. Urol Oncol, 2003. 21: 380.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14670549
1350.Mateo, J., et al. DNA-Repair Defects and Olaparib in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2015. 373: 1697.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26510020
1351.de Bono, J.S., Mateo, J., Fizazi, K., et al. Final overall survival (OS) analysis of PROfound: Olaparib vs physician’s choice of enzalutamide or abiraterone in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations. Ann Oncol 2020. 31: S507.
https://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534(20)40866-X/fulltext
1352.Badrising, S., et al. Clinical activity and tolerability of enzalutamide (MDV3100) in patients with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer who progress after docetaxel and abiraterone treatment. Cancer, 2014. 120: 968.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24382803
1353.Zhang, T., et al. Enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate for the treatment of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Expert Opin Pharmacother, 2015. 16: 473.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25534660
1354.Antonarakis, E.S., et al. AR-V7 and resistance to enzalutamide and abiraterone in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2014. 371: 1028.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25184630
1355.Attard, G., et al. Abiraterone Alone or in Combination With Enzalutamide in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer With Rising Prostate-Specific Antigen During Enzalutamide Treatment. J Clin Oncol, 2018. 36: 2639.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30028657
1356.Serafini, A.N. Current status of systemic intravenous radiopharmaceuticals for the treatment of painful metastatic bone disease. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1994. 30: 1187.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7525518
1357.Ballinger, J.R. Theranostic radiopharmaceuticals: established agents in current use. Br J Radiol, 2018. 91: 20170969.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29474096
1358.Emmett, L., et al. Lutetium (177) PSMA radionuclide therapy for men with prostate cancer: a review of the current literature and discussion of practical aspects of therapy. J Med Radiat Sci, 2017. 64: 52.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28303694
1359.Calopedos, R.J.S., et al. Lutetium-177-labelled anti-prostate-specific membrane antigen antibody and ligands for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2017. 20: 352.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28440324
1360.Hofman, M.S., et al. [(177)Lu]-PSMA-617 radionuclide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (LuPSMA trial): a single-centre, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol, 2018. 19: 825.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29752180
1361.Emmett, L., et al. Results of a Prospective Phase 2 Pilot Trial of (177)Lu-PSMA-617 Therapy for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Including Imaging Predictors of Treatment Response and Patterns of Progression. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2019. 17: 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30425003
1362.Hofman, M.S., et al. [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet, 2021. 397: 797.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33581798
1363.Hofman, M.S., et al. TheraP: 177Lu-PSMA-617 (LuPSMA) versus cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing after docetaxel—Overall survival after median follow-up of 3 years (ANZUP 1603). J Clin Oncol 2022. 40: 5000.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.5000
1364.Hofman, M.S., et al. Overall survival with [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): secondary outcomes of a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2024. 25: 99.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38043558
1365.Sartor, O., et al. Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2021. 385: 1091.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34161051
1366.Armstrong, A.J., et al. Association of Declining Prostate-specific Antigen Levels with Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Receiving [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in the Phase 3 VISION Trial. Eur Urol, 2024. 86: 552.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39242323
1367.Sadaghiani, M.S., et al. (177) Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy effectiveness in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate, 2022. 82: 826.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35286735
1368.Gafita, A., et al. RECIP 1.0 Predicts Progression-Free Survival After [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA Radiopharmaceutical Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med, 2024. 65: 917.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38637143
1369.Pathmanandavel, S., et al. Evaluation of (177)Lu-PSMA-617 SPECT/CT Quantitation as a Response Biomarker Within a Prospective (177)Lu-PSMA-617 and NOX66 Combination Trial (LuPIN). J Nucl Med, 2023. 64: 221.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36008120
1370.Unterrainer, L.M., et al. Evidence-Based Clinical Protocols to Monitor Efficacy of [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA Radiopharmaceutical Therapy in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Using Real-World Data. J Nucl Med, 2025. 66: 1054.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40274370
1371.Rosar, F., et al. Efficacy and safety of rechallenge [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RLT after initial partial remission in patients with mCRPC: evaluation of a prospective registry (REALITY study). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2024. 51: 4151.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39008067
1372.Lee, D.Y., et al. Effects of (225)Ac-Labeled Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Radioligand Therapy in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. J Nucl Med, 2022. 63: 840.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34503960
1373.Sathekge, M.M., et al. Actinium-225-PSMA radioligand therapy of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (WARMTH Act): a multicentre, retrospective study. Lancet Oncol, 2024. 25: 175.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38218192
1374.Ballal, S., et al. Long-term survival outcomes of salvage [(225)Ac]Ac-PSMA-617 targeted alpha therapy in patients with PSMA-expressing end-stage metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a real-world study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2023. 50: 3777.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37462775
1375.Emmett, L., et al. [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (ENZA-p): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2024. 25: 563.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38621400
1376.European Medicines Agency. Lynparza (olaparib). 2014. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/lynparza
1377.Abida, W., et al. Rucaparib in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Harboring a BRCA1 or BRCA2 Gene Alteration. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 3763.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32795228
1378.U.S. Food and Drug Adminstration. FDA grants accelerated approval to rucaparib for BRCA-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. 2020. 2022.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-rucaparib-brca-mutated-metastatic-castration-resistant-prostate
1379.Khalaf, D.J., et al. Optimal sequencing of enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2, crossover trial. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 1730.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31727538
1380.Miyake, H., et al. Comparative Assessment of Efficacies Between 2 Alternative Therapeutic Sequences With Novel Androgen Receptor-Axis-Targeted Agents in Patients With Chemotherapy-Naive Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2017. 15: e591.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28063845
1381.Terada, N., et al. Exploring the optimal sequence of abiraterone and enzalutamide in patients with chemotherapy-naive castration-resistant prostate cancer: The Kyoto-Baltimore collaboration. Int J Urol, 2017. 24: 441.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28455853
1382.Azad, A.A., et al. Efficacy of enzalutamide following abiraterone acetate in chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. Eur Urol, 2015. 67: 23.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25018038
1383.Kobayashi, T., et al. Sequential Use of Androgen Receptor Axis-targeted Agents in Chemotherapy-naive Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis With 3-Year Follow-up. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2020. 18: e46.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31759831
1384.Komura, K., et al. Comparison of Radiographic Progression-Free Survival and PSA Response on Sequential Treatment Using Abiraterone and Enzalutamide for Newly Diagnosed Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis from Multicenter Cohort. J Clin Med, 2019. 8.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31430900
1385.Matsubara, N., et al. Abiraterone Followed by Enzalutamide Versus Enzalutamide Followed by Abiraterone in Chemotherapy-naive Patients With Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2018. 16: 142.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29042308
1386.Maughan, B.L., et al. Comparing Sequencing of Abiraterone and Enzalutamide in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Study. Prostate, 2017. 77: 33.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27527643
1387.U.S. Food & Drug Adminstration. FDA expands Pluvicto’s metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer indication. 2025.
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-expands-pluvictos-metastatic-castration-resistant-prostate-cancer-indication
1388.Mori, K., et al. Sequential therapy of abiraterone and enzalutamide in castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2020. 23: 539.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32152435
1389.Lavaud, P., et al. Anticancer Activity and Tolerance of Treatments Received Beyond Progression in Men Treated Upfront with Androgen Deprivation Therapy With or Without Docetaxel for Metastatic Castration-naive Prostate Cancer in the GETUG-AFU 15 Phase 3 Trial. Eur Urol, 2018. 73: 696.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29074061
1390.Hager, S., et al. Anti-tumour activity of platinum compounds in advanced prostate cancer-a systematic literature review. Ann Oncol, 2016. 27: 975.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27052650
1391.Corn, P.G., et al. Cabazitaxel plus carboplatin for the treatment of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers: a randomised, open-label, phase 1-2 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 1432.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31515154
1392.Aparicio, A.M., et al. Platinum-based chemotherapy for variant castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res, 2013. 19: 3621.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23649003
1393.Mota, J.M., et al. Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Metastatic Prostate Cancer With DNA Repair Gene Alterations. JCO Precis Oncol, 2020. 4: 355.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32856010
1394.Fazekas, T., et al. Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors Have Comparable Efficacy with Platinum Chemotherapy in Patients with BRCA-positive Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 365.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37722977
1395.Heimdorfer, D., et al. Unraveling molecular characteristics and tumor microenvironment dynamics of neuroendocrine prostate cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2024. 150: 462.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39412660
1396.Haffner, M.C., et al. Framework for the Pathology Workup of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Biopsies. Clin Cancer Res, 2025. 31: 466.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39589343
1397.Berchuck, J.E., et al. Clinical considerations for the management of androgen indifferent prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 623.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33568748
1398.Merkens, L.S., et al. Androgen-indifferent prostate cancer: Pathogenesis, biomarkers, and therapeutic strategies. . Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2022. 33: 170.
1399.Aggarwal, R., et al. Neuroendocrine prostate cancer: subtypes, biology, and clinical outcomes. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2014. 12: 719.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24812138
1400.Fizazi, K., et al. Nonmetastatic, Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer and Survival with Darolutamide. N Engl J Med, 2020. 383: 1040.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32905676
1401.Sternberg, C.N., et al. Enzalutamide and Survival in Nonmetastatic, Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2020. 382: 2197.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32469184
1402.Smith, M.R., et al. Apalutamide and Overall Survival in Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2021. 79: 150.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32907777
1403.Petrylak, D.P., et al. Docetaxel and estramustine compared with mitoxantrone and prednisone for advanced refractory prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2004. 351: 1513.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15470214
1404.Rathkopf, D.E., et al. Updated interim efficacy analysis and long-term safety of abiraterone acetate in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients without prior chemotherapy (COU-AA-302). Eur Urol, 2014. 66: 815.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24647231
1405.Kantoff, P.W., et al. Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2010. 363: 411.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20818862
1406.Small, E.J., et al. Placebo-controlled phase III trial of immunologic therapy with sipuleucel-T (APC8015) in patients with metastatic, asymptomatic hormone refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2006. 24: 3089.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16809734
1407.Chi, K.N., et al. Niraparib and Abiraterone Acetate for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2023. 41: 3339.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36952634
1408.Bahl, A., et al. Impact of cabazitaxel on 2-year survival and palliation of tumour-related pain in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated in the TROPIC trial. Ann Oncol, 2013. 24: 2402.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23723295
1409.Gillessen, S., et al. Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer: recommendations of the St Gallen Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2015. Ann Oncol, 2015. 26: 1589.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26041764
1410.Saad, F., et al. Prostate-specific Antigen Progression in Enzalutamide-treated Men with Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Any Rise in Prostate-specific Antigen May Require Closer Monitoring. Eur Urol, 2020. 78: 847.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33010985
1411.Aggarwal, R., et al. Heterogeneous Flare in Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography Tracer Uptake with Initiation of Androgen Pathway Blockade in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2018. 1: 78.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31100231
1412.Payne, H., et al. Prostate-specific antigen: an evolving role in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment evaluation in prostate cancer. Urol Oncol, 2011. 29: 593.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20060331
1413.Pezaro, C., et al. Visceral disease in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2014. 65: 270.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24295792
1414.Gillessen, S., et al. Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019. Eur Urol, 2020. 77: 508.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32001144
1415.Gillessen, S., et al. Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer-metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022. Eur J Cancer, 2023. 185: 178.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37003085
1416.Rao, K., et al. Uro-oncology multidisciplinary meetings at an Australian tertiary referral centre--impact on clinical decision-making and implications for patient inclusion. BJU Int, 2014. 114 Suppl 1: 50.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25070295
1417.Cereceda, L.E., et al. Management of vertebral metastases in prostate cancer: a retrospective analysis in 119 patients. Clin Prostate Cancer, 2003. 2: 34.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15046682
1418.Chaichana, K.L., et al. Outcome following decompressive surgery for different histological types of metastatic tumors causing epidural spinal cord compression. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine, 2009. 11: 56.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19569942
1419.Hoskin, P., et al. A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Ibandronate Compared With Single-Dose Radiotherapy for Localized Metastatic Bone Pain in Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015. 107.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26242893
1420.Frankel, B.M., et al. Percutaneous vertebral augmentation: an elevation in adjacent-level fracture risk in kyphoplasty as compared with vertebroplasty. Spine J, 2007. 7: 575.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17905320
1421.Dutka, J., et al. Time of survival and quality of life of the patients operatively treated due to pathological fractures due to bone metastases. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil, 2003. 5: 276.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18034018
1422.Frankel, B.M., et al. Segmental polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw fixation in patients with bone softening caused by osteoporosis and metastatic tumor involvement: a clinical evaluation. Neurosurgery, 2007. 61: 531.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17881965
1423.Lawton, A.J., et al. Assessment and Management of Patients With Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: A Multidisciplinary Review. J Clin Oncol, 2019. 37: 61.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30395488
1424.Saad, F., et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of zoledronic acid in patients with hormone-refractory metastatic prostate carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2002. 94: 1458.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12359855
1425.Fizazi, K., et al. Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind study. Lancet, 2011. 377: 813.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21353695
1426.Smith, M.R., et al. Denosumab and bone-metastasis-free survival in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: results of a phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet, 2012. 379: 39.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22093187
1427.Marco, R.A., et al. Functional and oncological outcome of acetabular reconstruction for the treatment of metastatic disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2000. 82: 642.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10819275
1428.Stopeck, A.T., et al. Safety of long-term denosumab therapy: results from the open label extension phase of two phase 3 studies in patients with metastatic breast and prostate cancer. Support Care Cancer, 2016. 24: 447.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26335402
1429.Aapro, M., et al. Guidance on the use of bisphosphonates in solid tumours: recommendations of an international expert panel. Ann Oncol, 2008. 19: 420.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17906299
1430.Otto, S., Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws, ed. S. Otto. 2015, Berlin Heidelberg.
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-662-43733-9
1431.European Medicines Agency. Xgeva. 2019. 2022.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/xgeva
1432.Stopeck, A.T., et al. Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind study. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28: 5132.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21060033
1433.Body, J.J., et al. Hypocalcaemia in patients with metastatic bone disease treated with denosumab. Eur J Cancer, 2015. 51: 1812.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26093811
1434.Rice, S.M., et al. Depression and Prostate Cancer: Examining Comorbidity and Male-Specific Symptoms. Am J Mens Health, 2018. 12: 1864.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29957106
1435.van Stam, M.A., et al. Prevalence and correlates of mental health problems in prostate cancer survivors: A case-control study comparing survivors with general population peers. Urol Oncol, 2017. 35: 531 e1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28457651
1436.Stephenson, A.J., et al. Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition. J Clin Oncol, 2006. 24: 3973.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16921049
1437.Horwitz, E.M., et al. Definitions of biochemical failure that best predict clinical failure in patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation alone: a multi-institutional pooled analysis. J Urol, 2005. 173: 797.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15711272
1438.Stamey, T.A., et al. Prostate specific antigen in the diagnosis and treatment of adenocarcinoma of the prostate. II. Radical prostatectomy treated patients. J Urol, 1989. 141: 1076.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2468795
1439.Jackson, W.C., et al. Impact of Biochemical Failure After Salvage Radiation Therapy on Prostate Cancer-specific Mortality: Competition Between Age and Time to Biochemical Failure. Eur Urol Oncol, 2018. 1: 276.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31100248
1440.Grivas, N., et al. Ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen level as a predictor of biochemical progression after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Towards risk adapted follow-up. J Clin Lab Anal, 2019. 33: e22693.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30365194
1441.Shen, S., et al. Ultrasensitive serum prostate specific antigen nadir accurately predicts the risk of early relapse after radical prostatectomy. J Urol, 2005. 173: 777.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15711268
1442.Zakaria, A.S., et al. Detectable Prostate-specific antigen value between 0.01 and 0.1 ng/ml following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): does it correlate with future biochemical recurrence? World J Urol, 2021. 39: 1853.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32696130
1443.Ray, M.E., et al. PSA nadir predicts biochemical and distant failures after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a multi-institutional analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2006. 64: 1140.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16198506
1444.Oefelein, M.G., et al. The incidence of prostate cancer progression with undetectable serum prostate specific antigen in a series of 394 radical prostatectomies. J Urol, 1995. 154: 2128.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7500474
1445.Doneux, A., et al. The utility of digital rectal examination after radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol), 2005. 17: 172.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15901001
1446.Chaplin, B.J., et al. Digital rectal examination is no longer necessary in the routine follow-up of men with undetectable prostate specific antigen after radical prostatectomy: the implications for follow-up. Eur Urol, 2005. 48: 906.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16126322
1447.Warren, K.S., et al. Is routine digital rectal examination required for the followup of prostate cancer? J Urol, 2007. 178: 115.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17499293
1448.Wilt, T.J., et al. Follow-up of Prostatectomy versus Observation for Early Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2017. 377: 132.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28700844
1449.Beesley, L.J., et al. Individual and Population Comparisons of Surgery and Radiotherapy Outcomes in Prostate Cancer Using Bayesian Multistate Models. JAMA Netw Open, 2019. 2: e187765.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30707231
1450.Marshall, C.H., et al. Timing of Androgen Deprivation Treatment for Men with Biochemical Recurrent Prostate Cancer in the Context of Novel Therapies. J Urol, 2021. 206: 623.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34003011
1451.Loblaw, A., et al. Follow-up Care for Survivors of Prostate Cancer - Clinical Management: a Program in Evidence-Based Care Systematic Review and Clinical Practice Guideline. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol), 2017. 29: 711.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28928084
1452.Thorstenson, A., et al. Incidence of fractures causing hospitalisation in prostate cancer patients: results from the population-based PCBaSe Sweden. Eur J Cancer, 2012. 48: 1672.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22386317
1453.Franck Lissbrant, I., et al. Set-up and preliminary results from the Patient-overview Prostate Cancer. Longitudinal registration of treatment of advanced prostate cancer in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden. Scand J Urol, 2020. 54: 227.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32363988
1454.Saad, F., et al. Testosterone Breakthrough Rates during Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Castration Sensitive Prostate Cancer. J Urol, 2020. 204: 416.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32096678
1455.Rouleau, M., et al. Discordance between testosterone measurement methods in castrated prostate cancer patients. Endocr Connect, 2019. 8: 132.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30673630
1456.Morote, J., et al. Serum Testosterone Levels in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone Agonist Therapy. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2018. 16: e491.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29198640
1457.Long, M.E., et al. Decreased testosterone recovery after androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Can J Urol, 2021. 28: 10738.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34378507
1458.Nascimento, B., et al. Testosterone Recovery Profiles After Cessation of Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. J Sex Med, 2019. 16: 872.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31080102
1459.Beer, T.M., et al. Hepatic effects assessed by review of safety data in enzalutamide castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) trials. J Clin Oncol 2018. 36: 199.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.6_suppl.199
1460.Yanagisawa, T., et al. Abiraterone acetate versus nonsteroidal antiandrogen with androgen deprivation therapy for high-risk metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Prostate, 2022. 82: 3.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34559410
1461.Beer, T.M., et al. The prognostic value of hemoglobin change after initiating androgen-deprivation therapy for newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer: A multivariate analysis of Southwest Oncology Group Study 8894. Cancer, 2006. 107: 489.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16804926
1462.Ebbinge, M., et al. Clinical and prognostic significance of changes in haemoglobin concentration during 1 year of androgen-deprivation therapy for hormone-naive bone-metastatic prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2018. 122: 583.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29611275
1463.Iacovelli, R., et al. The Cardiovascular Toxicity of Abiraterone and Enzalutamide in Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2018. 16: e645.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29339044
1464.Rizzo, A., et al. Risk of cardiovascular toxicities and hypertension in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with novel hormonal agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol, 2021. 17: 1237.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34407702
1465.Gong, J., et al. Reduced Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Increased Cardiovascular Mortality After Prolonged Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. JACC CardioOncol, 2020. 2: 553.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34396266
1466.Attard, G., et al. Assessment of the Safety of Glucocorticoid Regimens in Combination With Abiraterone Acetate for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Randomized, Open-label Phase 2 Study. JAMA Oncol, 2019. 5: 1159.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31246234
1467.James, N., et al. TRAPEZE: a randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy with zoledronic acid, strontium-89, or both, in men with bony metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer. Health Technol Assess, 2016. 20: 1.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27434595
1468.Ng, H.S., et al. Development of comorbidities in men with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy: an Australian population-based cohort study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2018. 21: 403.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29720722
1469.Kanis, J.A., et al. Case finding for the management of osteoporosis with FRAX--assessment and intervention thresholds for the UK. Osteoporos Int, 2008. 19: 1395.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18751937
1470.Cianferotti, L., et al. The prevention of fragility fractures in patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer: a position statement by the international osteoporosis foundation. Oncotarget, 2017. 8: 75646.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29088899
1471.Hamdy, R.C., et al. Algorithm for the management of osteoporosis. South Med J, 2010. 103: 1009.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20818296
1472.Higano, C.S. Bone loss and the evolving role of bisphosphonate therapy in prostate cancer. Urol Oncol, 2003. 21: 392.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14670551
1473.Sharma, A., et al. A prospective longitudinal study to evaluate bone health, implication of FRAX tool and impact on quality of life (FACT-P) in advanced prostate cancer patients. Am J Clin Exp Urol, 2021. 9: 211.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34327260
1474.Edmunds, K., et al. Incidence of the adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a systematic literature review. Support Care Cancer, 2020. 28: 2079.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31912360
1475.Daniell, H.W. Osteoporosis due to androgen deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer. Urology, 2001. 58: 101.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11502461
1476.Edmunds, K., et al. The role of exercise in the management of adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a rapid review. Support Care Cancer, 2020. 28: 5661.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32699997
1477.Thomas, H.R., et al. Association Between Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Patient-reported Depression in Men With Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2018. 16: 313.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29866496
1478.Hoogland, A.I., et al. Systemic inflammation and symptomatology in patients with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy: Preliminary findings. Cancer, 2021. 127: 1476.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33378113
1479.Gonzalez, B.D., et al. Course and Predictors of Cognitive Function in Patients With Prostate Cancer Receiving Androgen-Deprivation Therapy: A Controlled Comparison. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 2021.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25964245
1480.Duthie, C.J., et al. Maintenance of sexual activity following androgen deprivation in males. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2020. 153: 103064.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32712517
1481.Miller, P.D., et al. Prostate specific antigen and bone scan correlation in the staging and monitoring of patients with prostatic cancer. Br J Urol, 1992. 70: 295.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1384920
1482.Bryce, A.H., et al. Patterns of Cancer Progression of Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer in the ECOG3805 CHAARTED Trial. Eur Urol Oncol, 2020. 3: 717.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32807727
1483.Padhani, A.R., et al. Rationale for Modernising Imaging in Advanced Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Focus, 2017. 3: 223.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28753774
1484.Lecouvet, F.E., et al. Monitoring the response of bone metastases to treatment with Magnetic Resonance Imaging and nuclear medicine techniques: a review and position statement by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer imaging group. Eur J Cancer, 2014. 50: 2519.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25139492
1485.Ulmert, D., et al. A novel automated platform for quantifying the extent of skeletal tumour involvement in prostate cancer patients using the Bone Scan Index. Eur Urol, 2012. 62: 78.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22306323
1486.Padhani, A.R., et al. METastasis Reporting and Data System for Prostate Cancer: Practical Guidelines for Acquisition, Interpretation, and Reporting of Whole-body Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Evaluations of Multiorgan Involvement in Advanced Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol, 2017. 71: 81.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27317091
1487.Trabulsi, E.J., et al. Optimum Imaging Strategies for Advanced Prostate Cancer: ASCO Guideline. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 1963.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31940221
1488.Bryce, A.H., et al. Radiographic progression with nonrising PSA in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: post hoc analysis of PREVAIL. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2017. 20: 221.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28117385
1489.Bourke, L., et al. Survivorship and improving quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 374.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25941049
1490.Prashar, J., et al. Supportive care needs of men with prostate cancer: A systematic review update. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 2022. 31: e13541.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35038783
1491.Resnick, M.J., et al. Prostate cancer survivorship care guideline: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline endorsement. J Clin Oncol, 2015. 33: 1078.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25667275
1492.Yiannopoulou, K.G., et al. Cognitive and Psychological Impacts of Different Treatment Options for Prostate Cancer: A Critical Analysis. Curr Urol, 2020. 14: 169.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33488334
1493.Venderbos, L.D.F., et al. Europa Uomo Patient Reported Outcome Study (EUPROMS): Descriptive Statistics of a Prostate Cancer Survey from Patients for Patients. Eur Urol Focus, 2021. 7: 987.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33281109
1494.Downing, A., et al. Quality of life in men living with advanced and localised prostate cancer in the UK: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol, 2019. 20: 436.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30713036
1495.Luckenbaugh, A.N., et al. Association between Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer and Mental Health Outcomes. J Urol, 2022. 207: 1029.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34978488
1496.Thompson, D., et al. Long-term Health-related Quality of Life in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 4.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36156268
1497.Marzouk, K., et al. Long-Term Cancer Specific Anxiety in Men Undergoing Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: Findings from a Large Prospective Cohort. J Urol, 2018. 200: 1250.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29886089
1498.Carlsson, S., et al. Surgery-related complications in 1253 robot-assisted and 485 open retropubic radical prostatectomies at the Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. Urology, 2010. 75: 1092.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20022085
1499.Ficarra, V., et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol, 2009. 55: 1037.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19185977
1500.Rabbani, F., et al. Comprehensive standardized report of complications of retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2010. 57: 371.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19945779
1501.Resnick, M.J., et al. Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2013. 368: 436.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23363497
1502.Parekh, A., et al. Reduced penile size and treatment regret in men with recurrent prostate cancer after surgery, radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation, or radiotherapy alone. Urology, 2013. 81: 130.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23273077
1503.Msezane, L.P., et al. Bladder neck contracture after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: evaluation of incidence and risk factors and impact on urinary function. J Endourol, 2008. 22: 377.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18095861
1504.Haglind, E., et al. Corrigendum re: "Urinary Incontinence and Erectile Dysfunction After Robotic Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Prospective, Controlled, Nonrandomised Trial" [Eur Urol 2015;68:216-25]. Eur Urol, 2017. 72: e81.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28552613
1505.Park, M.Y., et al. Comparison of biopsy strategies for prostate biopsy according to lesion size and PSA density in MRI-directed biopsy pathway. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2020. 45: 4166.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32737545
1506.Coughlin, G.D., et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: 24-month outcomes from a randomised controlled study. Lancet Oncol, 2018. 19: 1051.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30017351
1507.Alder, R., et al. Incidence of Inguinal Hernia after Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol, 2020. 203: 265.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31039101
1508.Fernando, H., et al. Incidence, Predictive Factors and Preventive Measures for Inguinal Hernia following Robotic and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review. J Urol, 2019. 201: 1072.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30730406
1509.Chiong, E., et al. Port-site hernias occurring after the use of bladeless radially expanding trocars. Urology, 2010. 75: 574.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19854489
1510.Donovan, J.L., et al. Patient-Reported Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2016. 375: 1425.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27626365
1511.Barocas, D.A., et al. Association Between Radiation Therapy, Surgery, or Observation for Localized Prostate Cancer and Patient-Reported Outcomes After 3 Years. JAMA, 2017. 317: 1126.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28324093
1512.Wallis, C.J., et al. Second malignancies after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 2016. 352: i851.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26936410
1513.Movsas, B., et al. Dose-Escalated Radiation Alone or in Combination With Short-Term Total Androgen Suppression for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Patient-Reported Outcomes From NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0815 Randomized Trial. J Clin Oncol, 2023. 41: 3217.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37104723
1514.Budaus, L., et al. Functional outcomes and complications following radiation therapy for prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol, 2012. 61: 112.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22001105
1515.Donovan, K.A., et al. Psychological effects of androgen-deprivation therapy on men with prostate cancer and their partners. Cancer, 2015. 121: 4286.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26372364
1516.Nguyen, P.L., et al. Adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy and strategies to mitigate them. Eur Urol, 2015. 67: 825.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25097095
1517.Cui, M.F., et al. Risks associated with cognitive function and management strategies in the clinical use of ADT: a systematic review from clinical and preclinical studies. Support Care Cancer, 2024. 32: 561.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39085696
1518.Cherrier, M.M., et al. Cognitive and mood changes in men undergoing intermittent combined androgen blockade for non-metastatic prostate cancer. Psychooncology, 2009. 18: 237.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18636420
1519.Hinojosa-Gonzalez, D.E., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer and neurocognitive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024. 27: 507.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38167924
1520.Alibhai, S.M., et al. Effects of long-term androgen deprivation therapy on cognitive function over 36 months in men with prostate cancer. Cancer, 2017. 123: 237.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27583806
1521.Herr, H.W., et al. Quality of life of asymptomatic men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy. J Urol, 2000. 163: 1743.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10799173
1522.Ong, W.L., et al. Testosterone Recovery Following Androgen Suppression and Prostate Radiotherapy (TRANSPORT): A Pooled Analysis of Five Randomized Trials from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 49.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39304428
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824026010?via%3Dihub
1523.Tombal, B.F., et al. A Phase 2 Randomized Open-label Study of Oral Darolutamide Monotherapy Versus Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Men with Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer (EORTC-GUCG 1532). Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 1051.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38272747
1524.Shore, N.D., et al. Improved Survival with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med, 2025.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/41124201
1525.Becker, B., et al. Comparison of Intermittent and Continuous Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer Patients: An Up-to-Date Meta-analysis for Urologists and Medical Providers. Urol Pract, 2023. 10: 424.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37505912
1526.O’Sullivan, N.J., et al. Surgical versus medical castration in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol, 2023: 20514158231212534.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20514158231212534
1527.Potosky, A.L., et al. Quality-of-life outcomes after primary androgen deprivation therapy: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. J Clin Oncol, 2001. 19: 3750.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11533098
1528.Saad, F., et al. Relugolix vs. Leuprolide Effects on Castration Resistance-Free Survival from the Phase 3 HERO Study in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Cancers (Basel), 2023. 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37835548
1529.Mell, L.K., et al. Effects of Androgen Deprivation Therapy on Prostate Cancer Outcomes According to Competing Event Risk: Secondary Analysis of a Phase 3 Randomised Trial. Eur Urol, 2024. 85: 373.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36710205
1530.Yanagisawa, T., et al. Impact of performance status on efficacy of systemic therapy for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2023. 132: 365.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37395151
1531.Walker, L.M., et al. Luteinizing hormone--releasing hormone agonists: a quick reference for prevalence rates of potential adverse effects. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2013. 11: 375.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23891497
1532.Elliott, S., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: recommendations to improve patient and partner quality of life. J Sex Med, 2010. 7: 2996.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20626600
1533.Iversen, P., et al. Bicalutamide monotherapy compared with castration in patients with nonmetastatic locally advanced prostate cancer: 6.3 years of followup. J Urol, 2000. 164: 1579.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11025708
1534.Iversen, P., et al. Nonsteroidal antiandrogens: a therapeutic option for patients with advanced prostate cancer who wish to retain sexual interest and function. BJU Int, 2001. 87: 47.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11121992
1535.Boccardo, F., et al. Bicalutamide monotherapy versus flutamide plus goserelin in prostate cancer patients: results of an Italian Prostate Cancer Project study. J Clin Oncol, 1999. 17: 2027.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10561254
1536.Irani, J., et al. Efficacy of venlafaxine, medroxyprogesterone acetate, and cyproterone acetate for the treatment of vasomotor hot flushes in men taking gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues for prostate cancer: a double-blind, randomised trial. Lancet Oncol, 2010. 11: 147.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19963436
1537.Russell, N., et al. Effects of oestradiol treatment on hot flushes in men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Eur J Endocrinol, 2022. 187: 617.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36806623
1538.Sloan, J.A., et al. Methodologic lessons learned from hot flash studies. J Clin Oncol, 2001. 19: 4280.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11731510
1539.Moraska, A.R., et al. Gabapentin for the management of hot flashes in prostate cancer survivors: a longitudinal continuation Study-NCCTG Trial N00CB. J Support Oncol, 2010. 8: 128.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20552926
1540.Frisk, J., et al. Two modes of acupuncture as a treatment for hot flushes in men with prostate cancer--a prospective multicenter study with long-term follow-up. Eur Urol, 2009. 55: 156.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18294761
1541.Smith, M.R., et al. Risk of clinical fractures after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy for prostate cancer. J Urol, 2006. 175: 136.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16406890
1542.Cree, M., et al. Mortality and institutionalization following hip fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2000. 48: 283.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10733054
1543.Compston, J.E., et al. Osteoporosis. Lancet, 2019. 393: 364.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30696576
1544.Saylor, P.J., et al. Metabolic complications of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. J Urol, 2009. 181: 1998.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19286225
1545.Stelmach-Mardas, M., et al. Influence of Androgen Deprivation Therapy on the Development of Sarcopenia in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Nutrients, 2024. 16.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38474784
1546.Gonnelli, S., et al. Obesity and fracture risk. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab, 2014. 11: 9.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25002873
1547.Myint, Z.W., et al. Evaluation of Fall and Fracture Risk Among Men With Prostate Cancer Treated With Androgen Receptor Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open, 2020. 3: e2025826.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33201234
1548.Sieber, P.R., et al. Bicalutamide 150 mg maintains bone mineral density during monotherapy for localized or locally advanced prostate cancer. J Urol, 2004. 171: 2272.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15126801
1549.Wadhwa, V.K., et al. Bicalutamide monotherapy preserves bone mineral density, muscle strength and has significant health-related quality of life benefits for osteoporotic men with prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2011. 107: 1923.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20950306
1550.Higano, C., et al. Bone mineral density in patients with prostate cancer without bone metastases treated with intermittent androgen suppression. Urology, 2004. 64: 1182.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15596194
1551.Nobes, J.P., et al. A prospective, randomized pilot study evaluating the effects of metformin and lifestyle intervention on patients with prostate cancer receiving androgen deprivation therapy. BJU Int, 2012. 109: 1495.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21933330
1552.Grundy, S.M., et al. Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation, 2005. 112: 2735.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16157765
1553.Braga-Basaria, M., et al. Metabolic syndrome in men with prostate cancer undergoing long-term androgen-deprivation therapy. J Clin Oncol, 2006. 24: 3979.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16921050
1554.Cheung, A.S., et al. Muscle and bone effects of androgen deprivation therapy: current and emerging therapies. Endocr Relat Cancer, 2014. 21: R371.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25056176
1555.Smith, M.R., et al. Sarcopenia during androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2012. 30: 3271.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22649143
1556.Papadopoulos, E., et al. The impact of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes in men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. PLoS One, 2023. 18: e0286381.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37262068
1557.Lu-Yao, G., et al. Changing patterns in competing causes of death in men with prostate cancer: a population based study. J Urol, 2004. 171: 2285.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15126804
1558.Saigal, C.S., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy increases cardiovascular morbidity in men with prostate cancer. Cancer, 2007. 110: 1493.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17657815
1559.Keating, N.L., et al. Diabetes and cardiovascular disease during androgen deprivation therapy: observational study of veterans with prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2010. 102: 39.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19996060
1560.Efstathiou, J.A., et al. Cardiovascular mortality and duration of androgen deprivation for locally advanced prostate cancer: analysis of RTOG 92-02. Eur Urol, 2008. 54: 816.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18243498
1561.Jones, C.U., et al. Radiotherapy and short-term androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2011. 365: 107.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21751904
1562.Mak, K.S., et al. Cardiovascular Mortality and Duration of Androgen Deprivation in Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: Long-term Update of NRG/RTOG 9202. Eur Urol Focus, 2024. 10: 271.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38307806
1563.Butler, S.S., et al. Risk of cardiovascular mortality with androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer: A secondary analysis of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Randomized Controlled Trial. Cancer, 2021. 127: 2213.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33905530
1564.Nguyen, P.L., et al. Association of androgen deprivation therapy with cardiovascular death in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA, 2011. 306: 2359.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22147380
1565.Bourke, L., et al. Endocrine therapy in prostate cancer: time for reappraisal of risks, benefits and cost-effectiveness? Br J Cancer, 2013. 108: 9.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23321508
1566.Blankfield, R.P. Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer and cardiovascular death. JAMA, 2012. 307: 1252; author reply 1252.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22453560
1567.Bosco, C., et al. Quantifying observational evidence for risk of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease following androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2015. 68: 386.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25484142
1568.Swaby, J., et al. Association of Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Metabolic Disease in Prostate Cancer Patients: An Updated Meta-Analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2023. 21: e182.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36621463
1569.Nguyen, P.L., et al. Influence of androgen deprivation therapy on all-cause mortality in men with high-risk prostate cancer and a history of congestive heart failure or myocardial infarction. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2012. 82: 1411.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21708431
1570.Tsai, H.K., et al. Androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer and the risk of cardiovascular mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2007. 99: 1516.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17925537
1571.Lopes, R.D., et al. Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Prostate Cancer: The Primary Results of the PRONOUNCE Randomized Trial. Circulation, 2021. 144: 1295.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34459214
1572.Tisseverasinghe, S., et al. Should Prostate Cancer Patients With History of Cardiovascular Events Be Preferentially Treated With Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone Antagonists? J Clin Oncol, 2022. 40: 4173.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35862876
1573.Nelson, A.J., et al. Cardiovascular Effects of GnRH Antagonists Compared With Agonists in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. JACC CardioOncol, 2023. 5: 613.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37969642
1574.Gilbert, S.E., et al. Effects of a lifestyle intervention on endothelial function in men on long-term androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Br J Cancer, 2016. 114: 401.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26766737
1575.Cao, B., et al. Adverse Events and Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibitors in the Treatment of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Multivariate Network Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol, 2023. 6: 237.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36682938
1576.Aziz, M.K., et al. Prostate Cancer Therapy Cardiotoxicity Map (PROXMAP) for Advanced Disease States: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis with Bayesian Modeling of Treatment Histories. Eur Urol, 2025. 87: 15.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39299896
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283824025697?via%3Dihub
1577.Ong, C.S.H., et al. Cardiovascular risks of androgen receptor targeted agents in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2024. 27: 393.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38267540
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41391-024-00792-5
1578.Wilding, S., et al. Cancer-related symptoms, mental well-being, and psychological distress in men diagnosed with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy. Qual Life Res, 2019. 28: 2741.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31115843
1579.Bourke, L., et al. Exercise for Men with Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2016. 69: 693.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26632144
1580.Meng, F., et al. Stroke related to androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Cancer, 2016. 16: 180.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26940836
1581.Nead, K.T., et al. Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Future Alzheimer's Disease Risk. J Clin Oncol, 2016. 34: 566.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26644522
1582.Delmas, P.D. Clinical potential of RANKL inhibition for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis and other metabolic bone diseases. J Clin Densitom, 2008. 11: 325.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18375161
1583.Cummings, S.R., et al. Denosumab for prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med, 2009. 361: 756.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19671655
1584.Smith, M.R., et al. Denosumab in men receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med, 2009. 361: 745.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19671656
1585.Gupta, M., et al., Bisphosphonate Related Jaw Osteonecrosis, in StatPearls. 2023.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30521192
1586.Boquete-Castro, A., et al. Denosumab and osteonecrosis of the jaw. A systematic analysis of events reported in clinical trials. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2016. 27: 367.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25639776
1587.Bennett, D., et al. Factors influencing job loss and early retirement in working men with prostate cancer-findings from the population-based Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (LAPCD) study. J Cancer Surviv, 2018. 12: 669.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30058009
1588.Roberts, C., et al. The Experiences and Unmet Supportive Care Needs of Partners of Men Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer: A Meta-aggregation Systematic Review. Clin Neuropharmacol, 2022.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36480350
1589.James, C., et al. Fear of cancer recurrence and PSA anxiety in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer, 2022. 30: 5577.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35106656
1590.Mundle, R., et al. The effectiveness of psychological intervention for depression, anxiety, and distress in prostate cancer: a systematic review of literature. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 674.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33750905
1591.Borji, M., et al. Positive Effects of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Depression, Anxiety and Stress of Family Caregivers of Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2017. 18: 3207.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29281868
1592.Bourke, L., et al. A qualitative study evaluating experiences of a lifestyle intervention in men with prostate cancer undergoing androgen suppression therapy. Trials, 2012. 13: 208.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23151126
1593.Berruti, A., et al. Incidence of skeletal complications in patients with bone metastatic prostate cancer and hormone refractory disease: predictive role of bone resorption and formation markers evaluated at baseline. J Urol, 2000. 164: 1248.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10992374
1594.Carlin, B.I., et al. The natural history, skeletal complications, and management of bone metastases in patients with prostate carcinoma. Cancer, 2000. 88: 2989.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10898342
1595.Smith, D.P., et al. Quality of life three years after diagnosis of localised prostate cancer: population based cohort study. BMJ, 2009. 339: b4817.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19945997
1596.Taylor, K.L., et al. Long-term disease-specific functioning among prostate cancer survivors and noncancer controls in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial. J Clin Oncol, 2012. 30: 2768.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22734029
1597.Bhanvadia, S.K., et al. Financial Toxicity Among Patients with Prostate, Bladder, and Kidney Cancer: A Systematic Review and Call to Action. Eur Urol Oncol, 2021. 4: 396.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33820747
1598.Ratti, M.M., et al. Standardising the Assessment of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Localised Prostate Cancer. A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Oncol, 2022. 5: 153.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34785188
1599.Groenvold, M., et al. Validation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life questionnaire through combined qualitative and quantitative assessment of patient-observer agreement. J Clin Epidemiol, 1997. 50: 441.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9179103
1600.van Andel, G., et al. An international field study of the EORTC QLQ-PR25: a questionnaire for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer, 2008. 44: 2418.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18774706
1601.Cella, D.F., et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol, 1993. 11: 570.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8445433
1602.Esper, P., et al. Measuring quality of life in men with prostate cancer using the functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate instrument. Urology, 1997. 50: 920.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9426724
1603.Wei, J.T., et al. Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology, 2000. 56: 899.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11113727
1604.Szymanski, K.M., et al. Development and validation of an abbreviated version of the expanded prostate cancer index composite instrument for measuring health-related quality of life among prostate cancer survivors. Urology, 2010. 76: 1245.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20350762
1605.Litwin, M.S., et al. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure. Med Care, 1998. 36: 1002.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9674618
1606.Giesler, R.B., et al. Assessing quality of life in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: development of a new instrument for use in multiple settings. Qual Life Res, 2000. 9: 645.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11236855
1607.Lane, J.A., et al. Functional and quality of life outcomes of localised prostate cancer treatments (Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment [ProtecT] study). BJU Int, 2022. 130: 370.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35373443
1608.van As, N., et al. Radical Prostatectomy Versus Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer: Results of the PACE-A Randomised Trial. Eur Urol, 2024.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39266383
1609.Aksnessaether, B.Y., et al. Second Cancers in Patients With Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer Randomized to Lifelong Endocrine Treatment With or Without Radical Radiation Therapy: Long-Term Follow-up of the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group-7 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2020. 106: 706.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31786279
1610.Fransson, P., et al. Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYPO-RT-PC): patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol, 2021. 22: 235.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33444529
1611.Hoffman, K.E., et al. Patient-Reported Outcomes Through 5 Years for Active Surveillance, Surgery, Brachytherapy, or External Beam Radiation With or Without Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. JAMA, 2020. 323: 149.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31935027
1612.Lantz, A., et al. Functional and Oncological Outcomes After Open Versus Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Localised Prostate Cancer: 8-Year Follow-up. Eur Urol, 2021. 80: 650.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34538508
1613.Hunt, A.A., et al. Risk of erectile dysfunction after modern radiotherapy for intact prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 128.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32647352
1614.Giesler, R.B., et al. Improving the quality of life of patients with prostate carcinoma: a randomized trial testing the efficacy of a nurse-driven intervention. Cancer, 2005. 104: 752.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15986401
1615.Schumacher, O., et al. Effects of Exercise During Radiation Therapy on Physical Function and Treatment-Related Side Effects in Men With Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2021. 111: 716.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34246737
1616.Kang, D.W., et al. Effects of Exercise on Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Biochemical Progression in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer Under Active Surveillance: The ERASE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 1487.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34410322
1617.Anderson, C.A., et al. Conservative management for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015. 1: CD001843.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25602133
1618.Chen, Y.C., et al. Surgical treatment for urinary incontinence after prostatectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review. PLoS One, 2017. 12: e0130867.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28467435
1619.Crivellaro, S., et al. Systematic review of surgical treatment of post radical prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn, 2016. 35: 875.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26397171
1620.Cornu, J.-N., et al. , EAU Guidelines on Non-neurogenic Male LUTS, E.G. Office, Editor. 2023, EAU Guidelines Office: EAU Guidelines published at the 38th EAU Annual Congress, Milan.
https://uroweb.org/guidelines/management-of-non-neurogenic-male-luts
1621.Skolarus, T.A., et al. Androgen-deprivation-associated bone disease. Curr Opin Urol, 2014. 24: 601.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25144145
1622.Patel, H.R., et al. Effects of tadalafil treatment after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: quality of life, psychosocial outcomes, and treatment satisfaction results from a randomized, placebo-controlled phase IV study. BMC Urol, 2015. 15: 31.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879460
1623.Philippou, Y.A., et al. Penile rehabilitation for postprostatectomy erectile dysfunction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018. 10: CD012414.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30352488
1624.Salonia, A., et al., EAU Guidelines on Sexual and Reproductive Health. Edn. presented at the 38th Annual Congress, Milan T.N. EAU Guidelines Office, Editor. 2023: Arnhem, The Netherlands.
https://uroweb.org/guidelines/sexual-and-reproductive-health
1625.Schubach, K., et al. Experiences of sexual well-being interventions in males affected by genitourinary cancers and their partners: an integrative systematic review. Support Care Cancer, 2023. 31: 265.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37058163
1626.Dieperink, K.B., et al. The effects of multidisciplinary rehabilitation: RePCa-a randomised study among primary prostate cancer patients. Br J Cancer, 2013. 109: 3005.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24169342
1627.Dieperink, K.B., et al. Long-term follow-up 3 years after a randomized rehabilitation study among radiated prostate cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv, 2021. 15: 668.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33079329
1628.Galvao, D.A., et al. Combined resistance and aerobic exercise program reverses muscle loss in men undergoing androgen suppression therapy for prostate cancer without bone metastases: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28: 340.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949016
1629.Bourke, L., et al. Lifestyle changes for improving disease-specific quality of life in sedentary men on long-term androgen-deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Eur Urol, 2014. 65: 865.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24119318
1630.Cella, D., et al. Estimating clinically meaningful changes for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy--Prostate: results from a clinical trial of patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Value Health, 2009. 12: 124.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18647260
1631.Peppone, L.J., et al. High‐dose vitamin D to attenuate bone loss in patients with prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy: A phase 2 RCT. Cancer, 2024. 130: 2538.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38520382/
1632.Galvao, D.A., et al. Psychological distress in men with prostate cancer undertaking androgen deprivation therapy: modifying effects of exercise from a year-long randomized controlled trial. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2021. 24: 758.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33558661
1633.Lopez, P., et al. Resistance Exercise Dosage in Men with Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2021. 53: 459.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32890199
1634.Shao, W., et al. The effects of exercise on body composition of prostate cancer patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy: An update systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 2022. 17: e0263918.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35167609
1635.Ussing, A., et al. Supervised exercise therapy compared with no exercise therapy to reverse debilitating effects of androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2022. 25: 491.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34489536
1636.Toohey, K., et al. Exercise Adherence in Men with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Androgen Deprivation Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel), 2022. 14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35626058
1637.Boerrigter, E., et al. A Prospective Randomised Trial to Determine the Effect of a Reduced Versus Standard Dose of Enzalutamide on Side Effects in Frail Patients with Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2024. 7: 1376.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38485614
1638.Nair-Shalliker, V., et al. Post-treatment levels of plasma 25- and 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D and mortality in men with aggressive prostate cancer. Sci Rep, 2020. 10: 7736.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32385370
1639.Grant, W.B. Review of Recent Advances in Understanding the Role of Vitamin D in Reducing Cancer Risk: Breast, Colorectal, Prostate, and Overall Cancer. Anticancer Res, 2020. 40: 491.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31892604
1640.Coleman, R., et al. Bone health in cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol, 2020. 31: 1650.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32801018
1641.Shapiro, C.L., et al. Management of Osteoporosis in Survivors of Adult Cancers With Nonmetastatic Disease: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol, 2019. 37: 2916.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31532726
1642.Briot, K., et al. French recommendations for osteoporosis prevention and treatment in patients with prostate cancer treated by androgen deprivation. Joint Bone Spine, 2019. 86: 21.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30287350
1643.Saylor, P.J., et al. Bone Health and Bone-Targeted Therapies for Prostate Cancer: ASCO Endorsement of a Cancer Care Ontario Guideline. J Clin Oncol, 2020. 38: 1736.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31990618
1644.Brown, J.E., et al. Guidance for the assessment and management of prostate cancer treatment-induced bone loss. A consensus position statement from an expert group. J Bone Oncol, 2020. 25: 100311.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32995252
1645.Smith, M.R., et al. Randomized controlled trial of zoledronic acid to prevent bone loss in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. J Urol, 2003. 169: 2008.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12771706
1646.Michaelson, M.D., et al. Randomized controlled trial of annual zoledronic acid to prevent gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist-induced bone loss in men with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2007. 25: 1038.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17369566
1647.Migliorati, C.A., et al. Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis: a long-term complication of bisphosphonate treatment. Lancet Oncol, 2006. 7: 508.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16750501
1648.Wadhwa, V.K., et al. Frequency of zoledronic acid to prevent further bone loss in osteoporotic patients undergoing androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2010. 105: 1082.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19912210
1649.Clemons, M., et al. A randomised trial of 4- versus 12-weekly administration of bone-targeted agents in patients with bone metastases from breast or castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer, 2021. 142: 132.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33023785
1650.Roubaud, G., et al. Assessment of bone mineral density in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer treated with or without abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in the PEACE-1 phase 3 trial. Eur J Cancer, 2025. 218: 115293.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39923274
1651.Ohlmann C, O.E., Wille S, et al. . Second-line chemotherapy with docetaxel for prostate-specific antigen relapse in men with hormone refractory prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel based chemotherapy. . Eur Urol Suppl 2006. 5: abstract #289.
https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/jco.2005.23.16_suppl.4682
1652.Chen, R.C., et al. Association Between Choice of Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy, or Active Surveillance and Patient-Reported Quality of Life Among Men With Localized Prostate Cancer. JAMA, 2017. 317: 1141.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28324092
1653.Sanda, M.G., et al. Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. Part I: Risk Stratification, Shared Decision Making, and Care Options. J Urol, 2018. 199: 683.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29203269
1654.Makarov, D.V., et al. AUA White Paper on Implementation of Shared Decision Making into Urological Practice. Urol Pract, 2016. 3: 355.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37592546
1655.Stiggelbout, A.M., et al. Shared decision making: Concepts, evidence, and practice. Patient Educ Couns, 2015. 98: 1172.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26215573
1656.Violette, P.D., et al. Decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: Systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin, 2015. 65: 239.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25772796
1657.Ramsey, S.D., et al. Unanticipated and underappreciated outcomes during management of local stage prostate cancer: a prospective survey. J Urol, 2010. 184: 120.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20478590
1658.Connolly, T., et al. Regret in Decision Making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2016. 11: 212.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8721.00203
1659.Maguire, R., et al. Expecting the worst? The relationship between retrospective and prospective appraisals of illness on quality of life in prostate cancer survivors. Psychooncology, 2018. 27: 1237.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29430755
1660.Schroeck, F.R., et al. Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol, 2008. 54: 785.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18585849
1661.Steentjes, L., et al. Factors associated with current and severe physical side-effects after prostate cancer treatment: What men report. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 2018. 27.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27726215
1662.Orom, H., et al. What Is a "Good" Treatment Decision? Decisional Control, Knowledge, Treatment Decision Making, and Quality of Life in Men with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. Med Decis Making, 2016. 36: 714.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26957566
1663.Davison, B.J., et al. Quality of life, sexual function and decisional regret at 1 year after surgical treatment for localized prostate cancer. BJU Int, 2007. 100: 780.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17578466
1664.Wilding, S., et al. Decision regret in men living with and beyond nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the United Kingdom: A population-based patient-reported outcome study. Psychooncology, 2020. 29: 886.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32065691
1665.Martinez-Gonzalez, N.A., et al. Shared decision making for men facing prostate cancer treatment: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Patient Prefer Adherence, 2019. 13: 1153.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31413545
1666.Menichetti, J., et al. Quality of life in active surveillance and the associations with decision-making-a literature review. Transl Androl Urol, 2018. 7: 160.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29594030
1667.Ivlev, I., et al. Prostate Cancer Screening Patient Decision Aids: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med, 2018. 55: 896.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30337235
1668.Kinsella, N., et al. A Single Educational Seminar Increases Confidence and Decreases Dropout from Active Surveillance by 5 Years After Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol, 2019. 2: 464.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31277784
1669.Hoffman, R.M., et al. Selecting Active Surveillance: Decision Making Factors for Men with a Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. Med Decis Making, 2019. 39: 962.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31631745
1670.Berry, D.L., et al. Decision Support with the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate: A Multicenter Randomized Trial. J Urol, 2018. 199: 89.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28754540
1671.Campagna, J.P., et al. Prostate Cancer Survival Estimates by the General Public Using Unrestricted Internet Searches and Online Nomograms. Eur Urol Focus, 2020. 6: 959.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30723050
1672.de Freitas, H.M., et al. Patient Preferences for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treatments: A Discrete Choice Experiment Among Men in Three European Countries. Adv Ther, 2019. 36: 318.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30617763
1673.Lorent, M., et al. Meta-analysis of predictive models to assess the clinical validity and utility for patient-centered medical decision making: application to the CAncer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA). BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 2019. 19: 2.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30616621
1674.Riikonen, J.M., et al. Decision Aids for Prostate Cancer Screening Choice: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med, 2019. 179: 1072.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31233091
1675.Vromans, R.D., et al. Communicative aspects of decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment - A systematic review. Urol Oncol, 2019. 37: 409.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31053529