Search Results - "Gleason grading system"

Underestimation of Prostate Cancer Grade in Transperineal Fusion Biopsy and Its Predictive Factors: Correlation of Biopsy Findings with Post-Da Vinci Radical Prostatectomy Specimens.

Authors: Krzepkowski, Hubert Andrzej Ząbkowski, Tomasz Walędziak, Maciej et al.

Source: Journal of Clinical Medicine. Apr2026, Vol. 15 Issue 7, p2780. 13p.

ANGIOGENIC INDEX AS AN ADJUNCT TO GLEASON GRADING IN PROSTATE CANCER A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY.

Authors: Mishra, Rohit Singh, Aishwarya Ali3, Md. Asif et al.

Source: International Journal of Medicine & Public Health. Apr-Jun2026, Vol. 16 Issue 2, p3349-3354. 6p.

Prognostic Impact of Conglomerated Cribriform Morphology in Gleason Score 7 Prostate Adenocarcinoma.

Authors: Yaldır, Emel Şeker, Nazlı Sena Özen, Ata et al.

Source: Bulletin of Urooncology. Mar2026, Vol. 25 Issue 1, p1-5. 5p.

Prostate Cancer in a Sub-Saharan Tertiary Level Setting: Profile of Contemporary Gleason Grading Over 13 years.

Authors: Ngendahayo, Edouard Muvunyi, Thierry Zawadi Umurangwa, Florence Ngarambe et al.

Source: East & Central African Journal of Surgery. 2026, Vol. 31 Issue 1, p15-19. 5p.

Expression of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen in Prostatic Carcinoma and its Correlation with Gleason Score and Grade Grouping: A Cohort Study.

Authors: MANGARAJ, MADHUSMITA MOHANTY, MADHUSMITA JAGADEV, JAGAT BALLAV et al.

Source: Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research. Oct2025, Vol. 19 Issue 10, p5-10. 6p.

Trends in Prostate Cancer Incidence and Survival by Gleason Score from 2000 to 2020: A Population-Based Study in Northeastern Italy.

Authors: Taborelli, Martina Serraino, Diego Toffolutti, Federica et al.

Source: Current Oncology. Aug2025, Vol. 32 Issue 8, p426. 11p.

Current practices in prostate pathology reporting: results from a survey of genitourinary and general pathologists.

Authors: Nourbakshs, Mahra Du, Liping Acosta, Andres M et al.

Source: Histopathology. Aug2025, Vol. 87 Issue 2, p206-222. 17p.

Unique Biological Characteristics of Patients with High Gleason Score and Localized/Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer Using an In Silico Translational Approach.

Authors: Miyachi, Shiori Oshi, Masanori Sasaki, Takeshi et al.

Source: Current Oncology. Jul2025, Vol. 32 Issue 7, p409. 14p.

Influence of Artificial Intelligence Assistance on Gleason Grading and Prostate Cancer Detection by Uropathologists in Daily Practice: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

Authors: van Hees, Jacqueline E. van Diest, Paul J. Nguyen, Tri Q. et al.

Source: JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics. 6/10/2026, Vol. 10, p1-11. 11p.

Cribriform/Intraductal carcinoma exhibits superior prognostic value over Gleason pattern 4 percentage and tertiary pattern 5 in Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer.

Authors: Chen, Chaojiang Liu, Xiaoyang Wu, Shulin et al.

Source: World Journal of Urology. 5/12/2026, Vol. 44 Issue 1, p1-7. 7p.

Gleason Regrading After Prostatectomy—Results From the Irish Prostate Cancer Outcome Research (IPCOR) Situated in the International Context.

Authors: Gordon, Noa Patel, Ayush Amish Farooq, Wasfa et al.

Source: International Journal of Urology. May2026, Vol. 33 Issue 5, p1-12. 12p.

Transition to targeted transperineal prostate biopsies does not impact progression to curative treatment for patients initially entered into active surveillance.

Authors: Honore, Alfred Moen, Christian Arvei Reisæter, Lars Anders Rokne et al.

Source: Urologia Journal. May2026, Vol. 93 Issue 2, p185-191. 7p.

4D pathology: translating dynamic epithelial tubulogenesis to prostate cancer pathology.

Authors: Harikumar, Hridya van Royen, Martin E van Leenders, Geert JLH

Source: Histopathology. Mar2025, Vol. 86 Issue 5, p681-693. 13p.

Predictive factors for biochemical relapse in non-metastatic prostate cancer following primary radiotherapy.

Authors: Kovčić, Amila Umihanić, Šefika Osmić, Hasan et al.

Source: Medicinski Glasnik. Feb2025, Vol. 22 Issue 1, p83-87. 5p.

PSMA PET/MRI‐based Swin Transformer architecture for Gleason Score prediction in prostate cancer.

Authors: Yang, Tianshuo Zhang, Huai Peng, Huiling et al.

Source: Medical Physics. Jan2026, Vol. 53 Issue 1, p1-10. 10p.

Subjects: Prostate cancer, Gleason grading system, Magnetic resonance imaging, Data integration, Deep learning, Transformer models, Diagnostic imaging, Clinical decision making

Adverse pathology and low tumor volume in biopsy Gleason 3 + 4 prostate cancer: Toward safe expansion of active surveillance and focal therapy.

Authors: Ozawa, Yu Moschovas, Marcio Covas Sandri, Marco et al.

Source: Urologic Oncology. Aug2026, Vol. 44 Issue 8, p4-12. 9p.

External validation of an artificial intelligence model for Gleason grading of prostate cancer on prostatectomy specimens.

Authors: Schmidt, Bogdana Soerensen, Simon John Christoph Bhambhvani, Hriday P. et al.

Source: BJU International. Jan2025, Vol. 135 Issue 1, p133-139. 7p.

High body mass index increases the risk for prostate cancer and high Gleason score in northern Tanzania: data from prostate cancer screening.

Authors: Nicholaus Ngowi, Bartholomeo Mremi, Alex Seif, Mshangama et al.

Source: Ecancermedicalscience. 2025, Vol. 19 Issue 1824-1915, p1-8. 8p.

Assessment of microvascular flow by Doppler in prostate biopsy: correlation with the Gleason score.

Alternate Title: Avaliação do fluxo microvascular ao Doppler na biópsia de próstata: correlação com o escore de Gleason.

Authors: Vitor de Oliveira, João Peroni Borges, Alexandre Menezes Jales, Rodrigo et al.

Source: Radiologia Brasileira. 2025, Vol. 58, p1-4. 4p.

COMPARISON OF CONVENTIONAL AND MODIFIED GLEASON GRADING SYSTEMS.

Authors: Ali, Farhana Arshad, Madiha Afroze, Sana et al.

Source: Frontiers in Health Informatics. 2024, Vol. 13 Issue 8, p4304-4311. 8p.