1994
DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(94)90048-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nomogram for predicting the risk of node involvement in prostate cancer, given pretreatment prostate-specific antigen and gleason score

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 1 publication
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the recent years, there has been growing interest among radiation oncologists in developing predictive models of practical utility (ie, probability formulas and nomograms) in prostate cancer irradiation. Nearly all have been focused on disease control prediction (to help physicians and to counsel patients in the decision‐making process),1‐5 on the prediction of pathologic extension (to select anatomic target[s] for external beam radiation therapy [EBRT]6‐8), on supporting radiation oncologists in the decision of dose levels to be delivered,9 and on helping clinicians choose the appropriate combination of therapies both in standard practice (ie, neoadjuvant/adjuvant androgen suppression)3, 10 and in experimental clinical trials (ie, chemotherapy for high‐risk patients11 as in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] 0521 study and in the Dana‐Farber Cancer Institute Protocol 05‐043).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the recent years, there has been growing interest among radiation oncologists in developing predictive models of practical utility (ie, probability formulas and nomograms) in prostate cancer irradiation. Nearly all have been focused on disease control prediction (to help physicians and to counsel patients in the decision‐making process),1‐5 on the prediction of pathologic extension (to select anatomic target[s] for external beam radiation therapy [EBRT]6‐8), on supporting radiation oncologists in the decision of dose levels to be delivered,9 and on helping clinicians choose the appropriate combination of therapies both in standard practice (ie, neoadjuvant/adjuvant androgen suppression)3, 10 and in experimental clinical trials (ie, chemotherapy for high‐risk patients11 as in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] 0521 study and in the Dana‐Farber Cancer Institute Protocol 05‐043).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%