The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Scott E. Eggener to Biopsy

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Scott E. Eggener has written about Biopsy.
Connection Strength

2.218
  1. How active should active surveillance be? BJU Int. 2015 Feb; 115(2):176-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.375
  2. Amount of Gleason Pattern 3 Is Not Predictive of Risk in Grade Group 2-4 Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2024 Jul; 86(1):1-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.174
  3. Radical Prostatectomy Without Biopsy: Audacious, Imprudent, or Innovative? Eur Urol. 2022 08; 82(2):161-162.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.154
  4. Editorial Comment. J Urol. 2019 08; 202(2):263.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.127
  5. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10; 378(19):1767-1777.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.116
  6. Prostate cancer detection following diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Can J Urol. 2017 Apr; 24(2):8714-8720.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.109
  7. Extraprostatic Extension Is Extremely Rare for Contemporary Gleason Score 6 Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2017 09; 72(3):455-460.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.107
  8. Prostate Cancer Screening. JAMA. 2015 Aug 25; 314(8):825-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.097
  9. Contemporary Population-Based Comparison of Localized Ductal Adenocarcinoma and High-Risk Acinar Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate. Urology. 2015 Oct; 86(4):777-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.097
  10. Empiric antibiotics for an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level: a randomised, prospective, controlled multi-institutional trial. BJU Int. 2013 Nov; 112(7):925-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.084
  11. MR imaging-guided focal laser ablation for prostate cancer: phase I trial. Radiology. 2013 Jun; 267(3):932-40.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.082
  12. Patient selection for focal therapy of localized prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2009 May; 19(3):268-73.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.063
  13. Relationship of prostate-specific antigen velocity to histologic findings in a prostate cancer screening program. Urology. 2008 Jun; 71(6):1016-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.058
  14. Use of 2.6 ng/ml prostate specific antigen prompt for biopsy in men older than 60 years. J Urol. 2005 Dec; 174(6):2154-7, discussion 2157.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.050
  15. Stockholm3 in a Multiethnic Cohort for Prostate Cancer Detection (SEPTA): A Prospective Multicentered Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2024 Nov 10; 42(32):3806-3816.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.045
  16. Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline Part II: Considerations for a Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2023 07; 210(1):54-63.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  17. Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline Part I: Prostate Cancer Screening. J Urol. 2023 07; 210(1):46-53.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  18. Assessing the accuracy of multiparametric MRI to predict clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy naïve men across racial/ethnic groups. BMC Urol. 2022 Jul 18; 22(1):107.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  19. Pathological characteristics of the large renal mass: potential implication for clinical role of renal biopsy. Can J Urol. 2021 04; 28(2):10620-10624.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.036
  20. SPARED Collaboration: Patient Selection for Partial Gland Ablation in Men with Localized Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2019 11; 202(5):952-958.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  21. Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer by Use of MRI-Derived Quantitative Risk Maps: A Feasibility Study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019 08; 213(2):W66-W75.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  22. Multi-institutional Clinical Tool for Predicting High-risk Lesions on 3Tesla Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 05; 2(3):257-264.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  23. No Effect of Music on Anxiety and Pain During Transrectal Prostate Biopsies: A Randomized Trial. Urology. 2018 Jul; 117:31-35.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  24. Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Identification, Management, and Outcomes. Eur Urol. 2017 08; 72(2):238-249.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  25. Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes--a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol. 2015 Apr; 67(4):771-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  26. Development and multi-institutional validation of an upgrading risk tool for Gleason 6 prostate cancer. Cancer. 2013 Nov 15; 119(22):3992-4002.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  27. Quantitative analysis of multiparametric prostate MR images: differentiation between prostate cancer and normal tissue and correlation with Gleason score--a computer-aided diagnosis development study. Radiology. 2013 Jun; 267(3):787-96.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  28. Role of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in focal therapy of prostate cancer: report from a Consensus Panel. BJU Int. 2012 Oct; 110(7):942-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  29. High-grade ureteroscopic biopsy is associated with advanced pathology of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma tumors at definitive surgical resection. J Endourol. 2012 Apr; 26(4):398-402.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  30. Gleason 6 prostate cancer in one or two biopsy cores can harbor more aggressive disease. J Endourol. 2011 Apr; 25(4):699-703.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  31. Preoperative hydronephrosis, ureteroscopic biopsy grade and urinary cytology can improve prediction of advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 2010 Jul; 184(1):69-73.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  32. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol. 2007 Aug; 178(2):493-9; discussion 499.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.014
  33. Plasma cell infiltration of the urinary bladder. Urology. 2004 Jul; 64(1):156-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  34. Irritative voiding symptoms and microscopic hematuria caused by intraperitoneal calcified fat necrosis. Urology. 2002 Mar; 59(3):444.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.