期刊文献+

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer:is there a “middle ground” between active surveillance and definitive treatment?

原文传递
导出
摘要 In recent years,it has come a long way in the diagnosis,treatment,and follow-up of prostate cancer.Beside this,it was argued that definitive treatments could cause overtreatment,particularly in the very low,low,and favorable risk group.When alternative treatment and follow-up methods are being considered for this group of patients,active surveillance is seen as a good alternative for patients with very low and low-risk groups in this era.However,it has become necessary to find other alternatives for patients in the favorable risk group or patients who cannot adopt active follow-up.In the light of technological developments,the concept of focal therapy was introduced with the intensification of research to treat only the lesioned area instead of treating the entire organ for prostate lesions though there are not many publications about many of them yet.According to the initial results,it was understood that the results could be good if the appropriate focal therapy technique was applied to the appropriate patient.Thus,focal therapies have begun to find their"middle ground"place between definitive therapies and active follow-up.
机构地区 Department of Urology
出处 《Asian Journal of Andrology》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2019年第1期37-44,共8页 亚洲男性学杂志(英文版)
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献38

  • 1Dunn MW, Kazer MW. Prostate cancer overview. Semin Oncol Nurs 2011; 27: 241-50.
  • 2Brawer MK. Prostate cancer: epidemiology and screening. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 1999; 2: 2-6.
  • 3Brawer MK, Crawford ED, Fowler J, Lucia MS, Schr?eder FH. Prostate cancer: epidemiology and screening. Rev Urol 2000; 2 Suppl 4: S5-9.
  • 4Kulkarni JN, Valsangkar RS, Jadhav YR, Singh DP. Impact of Gleason pattern up gradation after radical prostatectomy for carcinoma prostate patients with low biopsy score (≤6). J Cancer Res Ther 2011; 7: 459-62.
  • 5Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM, Fair WR. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol 1997; 157: 559-62.
  • 6Bostwick DG. Gleason grading of prostatic needle biopsies. Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am J Surg Pathol 1994; 18: 796-803.
  • 7Cam K, Yucel S, Turkeri L, Akdas A. Accuracy of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: histopathological correlation to matched prostatectomy specimens. Int J Urol 2002; 9: 257-60.
  • 8Gregori A, Vieweg J, Dahm P, Paulson DF. Comparison of ultrasound-guided biopsies and prostatectomy specimens: predictive accuracy of Gleason score and tumor site. Urol Int 2001; 66: 66-71.
  • 9Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Eisenberger M, Dorey FJ, et al. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2005; 294: 433-9.
  • 10Lughezzani G, Gallina A, Larcher A, Briganti A, Capitanio U, et al. Radical prostatectomy represents an effective treatment in patients with specimen-confined high pathological Gleason score prostate cancer. BJU Int 2013; 111: 723-30.

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部