Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update.

By I. Thompson, J. Thrasher, G. Aus, A. Burnett, E. Canby-Hagino, Michael Cookson, A. D'Amico, R. Dmochowski, D. Eton, J. Forman and 6 more. Journal of Urology, 2007

1,213 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b2f61a9b4eec8010ad19e7420faa585e578dd18e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. M. Cooperberg
2. E. Klein
3. P. Carroll
4. J. Broering
5. C. Magi-Galluzzi
6. J. Simko
7. S. Falzarano
8. T. Maddala

Citations in the corpus

• Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. (2010, methodology): “These analyses were repeated on the subset of patients who had low-risk features under the AUA guidelines (PSA 10 ng/mL, Gleason score 6, and clinical stage T2a).(5) The ICC was also calculated for use of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy among men undergoing external-beam radiation therapy, ”
• Systematic Review: Comparative Effectiveness and Harms of Treatments for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer (2008, background): “Nonrandomized studies Primary ADT [3, 6] High Erectile dysfunction, loss of libido, breast tenderness, hot flashes, depression, mood changes, memory difficulties, fatigue, muscle, bone loss, and fractures RP and EBRT [3, 4, 6] Medium Adverse event definitions and severity varied widely; outcomes wer”
• A 17-gene assay to predict prostate cancer aggressiveness in the context of Gleason grade heterogeneity, tumor multifocality, and biopsy undersampling. (2014, background): “Consequently, for selected patients with low-risk disease, active surveillance (AS)—expectant management with curative intervention only for those with tumor progression—is endorsed in practice guidelines as an alternative to immediate therapy [2].”