The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Scott Eggener to Prostate-Specific Antigen

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Scott Eggener has written about Prostate-Specific Antigen.
Connection Strength

11.664
  1. A Comparison of Stockholm3, Serum Biomarkers, and Risk Calculators to Predict Prostate Cancer in a Racially and Ethnically Diverse Cohort: Evaluation of the Stockholm3 Multiethnic SEPTA Trial. J Urol. 2025 May; 213(5):590-599.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.772
  2. Time to stop reporting estimates of any prostate cancer risk with percentage of free prostate-specific antigen. Am J Clin Pathol. 2024 Jan 04; 161(1):1-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.707
  3. Risk Stratification of Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Individualizing Care in the Era of Active Surveillance. J Urol. 2023 07; 210(1):38-45.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.672
  4. Blood Prostate-specific Antigen by Volume of Benign, Gleason Pattern 3 and 4 Prostate Tissue. Urology. 2022 12; 170:154-160.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.643
  5. Prostate-specific Antigen to Predict Early Success of Focal Therapy: Focusing on Appropriate Endpoints. Eur Urol. 2020 08; 78(2):161-162.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.554
  6. Prostate Cancer and the Evolving Role of Biomarkers in Screening and Diagnosis. Radiol Clin North Am. 2018 Mar; 56(2):187-196.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.463
  7. Patient-Initiated Prostate Cancer Screening Among Older U.S. Men. Ann Intern Med. 2016 05 17; 164(10):702-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.417
  8. Prostate Cancer Screening. JAMA. 2015 Aug 25; 314(8):825-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.396
  9. National Prostate Cancer Screening Rates After the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Discouraging Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Aug 01; 33(22):2416-23.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.390
  10. How active should active surveillance be? BJU Int. 2015 Feb; 115(2):176-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.381
  11. Ongoing Gleason grade migration in localized prostate cancer and implications for use of active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2014 Oct; 66(4):611-2.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.358
  12. National trends in prostate cancer screening among older American men with limited 9-year life expectancies: evidence of an increased need for shared decision making. Cancer. 2014 May 15; 120(10):1491-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.356
  13. 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: 0.343
  14. 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations and prostate cancer screening rates. JAMA. 2012 Apr 25; 307(16):1692-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.314
  15. Population-based patterns and predictors of prostate-specific antigen screening among older men in the United States. J Clin Oncol. 2011 May 01; 29(13):1736-43.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.292
  16. Re: Effectiveness of antibiotics given to asymptomatic men for an increased prostate specific antigen. S. Baltaci, E. Suer, A. H. Haliloglu, M. I. Gokce, A. H. Elhan and Y. Beduk. J Urol 2009; 181: 128-132. J Urol. 2009 Jul; 182(1):396-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.257
  17. Length of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of biochemical recurrence. J Urol. 2009 Jul; 182(1):139-44.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.256
  18. Editorial comment on: Analysis of T1c prostate cancers treated at very low prostate-specific antigen levels. Eur Urol. 2009 Mar; 55(3):616.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.242
  19. 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: 0.237
  20. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol. 2007 Dec; 178(6):2260-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.230
  21. Editorial comment on: Methods of calculating prostate-specific antigen velocity. Eur Urol. 2007 Oct; 52(4):1050-1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.229
  22. Prediagnosis prostate specific antigen velocity is associated with risk of prostate cancer progression following brachytherapy and external beam radiation therapy. J Urol. 2006 Oct; 176(4 Pt 1):1399-403.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.214
  23. Predictors of subsequent prostate cancer in men with a prostate specific antigen of 2.6 to 4.0 ng/ml and an initially negative biopsy. J Urol. 2005 Aug; 174(2):500-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.197
  24. Projected outcomes of reduced-biopsy management of Grade Group 1 prostate cancer: implications for relabeling. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2025 Apr 01; 117(4):685-691.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.193
  25. Genome-wide association study of prostate-specific antigen levels in 392,522 men identifies new loci and improves prediction across ancestry groups. Nat Genet. 2025 Feb; 57(2):334-344.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.191
  26. The influence of the "cancer" label on perceptions and management decisions for low-grade prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023 11 08; 115(11):1364-1373.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.175
  27. Free PSA and Clinically Significant and Fatal Prostate Cancer in the PLCO Screening Trial. J Urol. 2023 10; 210(4):630-638.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.171
  28. Low-Grade Prostate Cancer: Time to Stop Calling It Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2022 09 20; 40(27):3110-3114.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.157
  29. Radical Prostatectomy Without Biopsy: Audacious, Imprudent, or Innovative? Eur Urol. 2022 08; 82(2):161-162.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.156
  30. Re: Use of Active Surveillance or Watchful Waiting for Low-risk Prostate Cancer and Management Trends Across Risk Groups in the United States 2010-2015. Eur Urol. 2019 08; 76(2):252.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.127
  31. Prostate cancer detection following diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Can J Urol. 2017 Apr; 24(2):8714-8720.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.111
  32. Variability in Outcomes for Patients with Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer (Gleason Score 7, International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Group 2-3) and Implications for Risk Stratification: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Focus. 2017 10; 3(4-5):487-497.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.110
  33. Risk of lymph node metastases in pathological gleason score=6 prostate adenocarcinoma: Analysis of institutional and population-based databases. Urol Oncol. 2017 01; 35(1):31.e1-31.e6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.107
  34. Phase II Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2016 12; 196(6):1670-1675.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.105
  35. Active surveillance monitoring: the role of novel biomarkers and imaging. Asian J Androl. 2015 Nov-Dec; 17(6):882-4; discussion 883.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.100
  36. Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes--a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol. 2015 Apr; 67(4):771-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.093
  37. Population-based assessment of prostate-specific antigen testing for prostate cancer in the elderly. Urol Oncol. 2015 Feb; 33(2):69.e29-34.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.092
  38. Prostate volumes derived from MRI and volume-adjusted serum prostate-specific antigen: correlation with Gleason score of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Nov; 201(5):1041-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.087
  39. 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: 0.086
  40. Comparison of models to predict clinical failure after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2009 Jan 15; 115(2):303-10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.063
  41. 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
  42. Contemporary survival results and the role of radiation therapy in patients with node negative seminal vesicle invasion following radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005 Apr; 173(4):1150-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.048
  43. Patterns of Recurrence Following Radiation and ADT for Pathologic Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer: A Multi-institutional Study. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2025 Jul-Aug; 15(4):e350-e361.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  44. 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: 0.046
  45. PRESTO: A Phase III, Open-Label Study of Intensification of Androgen Blockade in Patients With High-Risk Biochemically Relapsed Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (AFT-19). J Clin Oncol. 2024 Apr 01; 42(10):1114-1123.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.044
  46. 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: 0.042
  47. 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: 0.042
  48. 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: 0.040
  49. Update of the Standard Operating Procedure on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2020 Apr; 203(4):706-712.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.033
  50. 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
  51. 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: 0.030
  52. Contemporary Incidence and Outcomes of Prostate Cancer Lymph Node Metastases. J Urol. 2018 06; 199(6):1510-1517.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  53. Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Identification, Management, and Outcomes. Eur Urol. 2017 08; 72(2):238-249.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  54. Standardization of definitions in focal therapy of prostate cancer: report from a Delphi consensus project. World J Urol. 2016 Oct; 34(10):1373-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  55. Focal therapy in prostate cancer: international multidisciplinary consensus on trial design. Eur Urol. 2014 Jun; 65(6):1078-83.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  56. Evaluation of the prostate bed for local recurrence after radical prostatectomy using endorectal magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Feb 01; 85(2):378-84.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  57. Pathological upgrading and up staging with immediate repeat biopsy in patients eligible for active surveillance. J Urol. 2008 Nov; 180(5):1964-7; discussion 1967-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  58. 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
  59. Survival results in patients with screen-detected prostate cancer versus physician-referred patients treated with radical prostatectomy: early results. Urol Oncol. 2006 Nov-Dec; 24(6):465-71.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
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.