Central prostate pathology review: should it be mandatory?

[1]  Gleason Df.  Classification of prostatic carcinomas. , 1966 .

[2]  S. Piantadosi,et al.  Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. , 1997, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[3]  G. Muto,et al.  Effects of complete androgen blockade for 12 and 24 weeks on the pathological stage and resection margin status of prostate cancer. , 2002, Journal of clinical pathology.

[4]  L. Egevad,et al.  The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma , 2005, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[5]  L. Collette,et al.  Impact of pathology review of stage and margin status of radical prostatectomy specimens (EORTC trial 22911) , 2006, Virchows Archiv.

[6]  L. Egevad,et al.  The significance of modified Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens , 2006, Virchows Archiv.

[7]  S. Raab.  A Contemporary Study Correlating Prostate Needle Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Gleason Score , 2009 .

[8]  J. Epstein.  An update of the Gleason grading system. , 2010, The Journal of urology.

[9]  J. Epstein,et al.  The value of mandatory second opinion pathology review of prostate needle biopsy interpretation before radical prostatectomy. , 2010, The Journal of urology.

[10]  F. Montorsi,et al.  Original Gleason system versus 2005 ISUP modified Gleason system: the importance of indicating which system is used in the patient's pathology and clinical reports. , 2010, European urology.

[11]  R. Dhir.  Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma with glomeruloid features on needle biopsy , 2010 .

[12]  Jonathan I. Epstein,et al.  Interobserver variability in histologic evaluation of radical prostatectomy between central and local pathologists: findings of TAX 3501 multinational clinical trial. , 2011, Urology.

[13]  Ladan Fazli,et al.  The potential impact of reproducibility of Gleason grading in men with early stage prostate cancer managed by active surveillance: a multi-institutional study. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[14]  Eric A Singer,et al.  Gleason score 6 adenocarcinoma: should it be labeled as cancer? , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  L. Egevad,et al.  Implications of the International Society of Urological Pathology modified Gleason grading system. , 2012, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[16]  Prostate cancer pathology audits: is central pathology review still warranted? , 2012, The Canadian journal of urology.

[17]  T. Wiegel,et al.  Phase 3 study of adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait and see in pT3 prostate cancer: impact of pathology review on analysis. , 2013, European urology.

[18]  D. Berney,et al.  Standardization of Gleason grading among 337 European pathologists , 2013, Histopathology.