Does the yield of prostate cancer biopsy and repeat biopsy justify the frequency of their use? Commentary

Nature Clinical Practice Urology

Volumn 5, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 246-247

  Presti Jr , Joseph ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGE DISTRIBUTION; ANTIGEN DETECTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HUMAN; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATIC INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SHORT SURVEY; SYMPTOMATOLOGY;

EID: 43449133316     PISSN: 17434270     EISSN: 17434289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncpuro1056     Document Type: Short Survey

References (3)

1. Karakiewicz PI et al. (1997) Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 49: 55-59
2. Presti JC Jr et a. (2000) The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: Results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 163: 163-166
3. Djavan B et al. (2000) Optimal predictors of prostate cancer on repeat prostate biopsy: A prospective study of 1,051 men. J Urol 163: 1144-1148