Диссертация (1139442), страница 55
Текст из файла (страница 55)
Prospective validation of a risk calculator which calculates the probability of apositive prostate biopsy in a contemporary clinical cohort / H.A. Van Vugt [et al.]// Eur. J. Cancer. – 2012. – Vol. 48, N 12. – P. 1809-1815.347. Prostate cancer biomarkers: An update / J. Romero Otero [et al.] // Urol. Oncol. –2014. – N 1. – P. 397-399.348. Prostate cancer prevention trial and European randomized study of screening forprostate cancer risk calculators: a performance comparison in a contemporaryscreened cohort / V.
Cavadas [et al.] // Eur. Urol. – 2010. – Vol. 58, N 4. – P. 551558.349. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, andOvarian Cancer Screening Trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up / G.L.Andriole [et al.] // J. Natl. Cancer. Inst. – 2012. – Vol. 104, N 2. – P. 125-132.350. Prostate Cancer. 6th International Consultation on New Developments in ProstateCancer and Prostate Disease / J.
McConnell [et al.] – Paris, France: HealthPublications, 2006. – 368 p.299351. Prostate specific antigen concentration at age 60 and death or metastasis fromprostate cancer: case-control study / A.J. Vickers [et al.] // BMJ. – 2010. – Vol.341.[еlectronicresource]–URL-http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c4521.full.pdf.352. Prostate Study Group of the Austrian Society of Urology. The natural history oflower urinary tract symptoms over five years / С.
Temml [et al.] // Eur. Urol. –2003. – Vol. 43, N 4. – P. 374-380.353. Prostate-specific antigen – based prostate cancer screening: reduction of prostatecancer mortality after correction for nonattendance and contamination in theRotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for ProstateCancer / L.P. Bokhorst [et al.] // Eur. Urol. – 2014.
– Vol. 65, N 2. – P. 329-336.354. Prostate-specific antigen testing in Tyrol, Austria: prostate cancer mortalityreduction was supported by an update with mortality data up to 2008 / F.H.Schröder, M. Zappa // Int. J. Public. Health. – 2012. – Vol. 57, N 1. – P. 45-47.355. Prostatitis, sexually transmitted diseases, and prostate cancer: the California Men’sHealth Study [еlectronic resource] / I. Cheng [et al.] // PLoS One. – 2010. – Vol. 5,N 1. – URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2806913.356.
Puntis J. Using Clinical Practice Guidelines to Evaluate Quality of Care / J. Puntis,C. Holden, S. Smallman // Arch. Dis. Child. – 1990. – Vol. 65. – P. 335 – 337.357. Quality of care indicators for benign prostatic hyperplasia. A qualitative study / J.Navarro-Pérez [et al.] // Aten. Primaria. – 2013. – N 12. – P. 278-833.358. Racial differences in PSA screening interval and stage at diagnosis / W.R.Carpenter [et al.] // Cancer Causes Control. – 2010. – Vol.
21, N 7. – P. 10711080.359. Recent trends in mortality from benign prostatic hyperplasia / F. Levi [et al.] //Prostate. – 2003. – Vol. 56, N 3. – P. 207-211.360. Relation of high PSA accompanying acute urinary retention with prostatitis. / А.Kefi [et al.] // Тhe XlXth Congress of the EAU : аbstracts. – Vienna, Austria, 2004.– P. 144.361. Results of an epidemiological survey using a modified American UrologicalAssociation symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia in France / Р.Р.Sagnier P.P.
[et al.] // J. Urol. – 1994. – Vol. 151, N 5. – P. 1266-1270.300362. Risk assessment to guide prostate cancer screening decisions: a cost-effectivenessanalysis / A.J. Martin [et al.] // Med. J. Aust. – 2013. – Vol. 198, N 10. – P. 546550.363. Romero V. Kidney Stones: A Global Picture of Prevalence, Incidence, andAssociated Risk Factors / V. Romero, H. Akpinar, D.G. Assimos // Rev. Urol. –2010. – Vol. 12, N 2-3. – P.
86-96.364. Roobol M.J. Screening for prostate cancer: Results of the Rotterdam section of theEuropean Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) / M.J.Roobol, C.H. Bangma, F.H. Schröder // Eur. Urol. Suppl. – 2013. – Vol. 12, N 1. –P. 1-2.365. Roobol M.J. The use of nomograms in the detection of prostate cancer / M.J.Roobol // Prostate. – 2006. – Vol. 66, N 12.
– P. 1266-1267.366. Safarinejad M.R. Prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia in a population-basedstudy in Iranian men 40 years old or older / M.R. Safarinejad // Int. Urol. Nephrol.– 2008. – Vol. 40, N 4. – P. 921-931.367. Santos Dias J. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: clinical manifestations and evaluation/ J. Santos Dias // Tech. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. – 2012. – Vol. 15, N 4.
– P. 265-269.368. Schröder F.H. Early detection of prostate cancer: recommendations after 13 yearsof follow-up in the European randomised study / F.H. Schröder, M.J. Roobol, C.H.Bangma // Ned. Tijdschr. Geneeskd. – 2015. – Vol. 159. –[еlectronic resource].URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25850455.369. Schröder F.H. ERSPC and PLCO prostate cancer screening studies: what are thedifferences? / F.H. Schröder, M.J.
Roobol // Eur. Urol. – 2010. – Vol. 58, N 1. – P.46-52.370. Schröder F.H. Prostate-cancer mortality at 11 years of follow-up / F.H. Schröder[et al.] // N. Engl. J. Med. – 2012. – Vol. 366, N 11. – P. 981-990.371. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European RandomisedStudy of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up / F.H.Schröder [et al.] // Lancet. – 2014. – Vol. 384, N 9959.
– P. 2027-2035.372. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study / F.H.Schröder [et al.] // N. Engl. J. Med. – 2009. – Vol. 360, N 13. – P. 1320-1328.301373. Screening for prostate cancer [еlectronic resource] / D. Ilic [et al.] // CochraneDatabaseSyst.Rev.–2013.–Vol.1.–URL:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23440794.374. Screening for prostate cancer: results of the Rotterdam section of the Europeanrandomized study of screening for prostate cancer / M.J. Roobol [et al.] // Eur.Urol. – 2013. – Vol. 64, N 4. – P.
530-539.375. SEERStatFactSheets:Prostate.2011[еlectronicresource].–URL:http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html.376. Serrano D.P. The burden of LUTS and BPH in Asia / D.P. Serrano // The 1stCongress of Asian Pacific Prostate Society: the official presentation of the report. –Seoul, Korea, 2011. – 47 p.377. Smoking and prostate cancer in a multi-ethnic cohort / A.B.
Murphy [et al.] //Prostate. – 2013. – Vol. 73, N 14. – P. 1518-1528.378. Strategy for detection of prostate cancer based on relation between prostatespecific antigen at age 40-55 and long term risk of metastasis: case-control study /A.J. Vickers [et al.] // BMJ. – 2013. – Vol. 346. [еlectronic resource] –URL:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3933251.379. Strong effects of definition and nonresponse bias on prevalence rates of clinicalbenign prostatic hyperplasia: the Krimpen study of male urogenital tract problemsand general health status / М.Н. Blanker [et al.] // BJU Int.
– 2000. – Vol. 85. – P.665-71.380. Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for patientsin the supine versus prone position / L. Liu [et al.] // J. Endourol. – 2010. – Vol.24, N 12. – P. 1941-1946.381. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complicationsafter robot-assisted radical prostatectomy / G. Novara [et al.] // Eur. Urol. – 2012. –Vol. 62, N 3. – P. 431-452.382. The Efficacy of Drugs for the Treatment of LUTS/BPH, A Study in 6 EuropeanCountries. / A. Hutchison [et al.] // European Urology. – 2007. – Vol. 51, N 1.
– P.207-216.383. The national prostate cancer audit – introducing a new generation of cancer audit /A. Aggarwal [et al.] // Clin. Oncol. – 2014. – Vol. 26, N 2. – P. 90-93.302384. The natural history of lower urinary tract symptoms over five years / С. Temml [etal.] // Eur. Urol. – 2003. – Vol. 43, N 4.
– P. 374-380.385. The prevalence and correlates of urinary tract symptoms in Norwegian men: theHUNT study / А. Seim A. [et al.] // BJU Int. – 2005. – Vol. 96, N 1. – P. 88-92.386. The prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia in elderly men in Korea: acommunity-based study / H.K. Park [et al.] // Korean J. Urol. – 2009. – Vol.
50. –P. 843-847.387. The prevalence of BPH in Busan city over age 40 / H.Y. Rhew [et al.] // Korean J.Urol. – 2001. – Vol. 42 P. – 223-227.388. The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms in men and women in fourcentres. The UrEpik study / P. Boyle [et al.] // BJU Int. – 2003. – Vol. 92, N 4. – P.409-414.389. The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator and the relationship betweenprostate-specific antigen and biopsy outcome / A.J. Vickers [et al.] // Cancer.
–2013. – Vol. 119, N 16. – P. 3007-3011.390. The single-parameter, structure-based IsoPSA assay demonstrates improveddiagnostic accuracy for detection of any prostate cancer and high-grade prostatecancer compared to a concentration-based assay of total prostate-specific antigen: apreliminary report / E.A. Klein [et al.] // Eur. Urol. – 2017. – N 72. – Р. 942-949.391. The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy /A.J. Vickers [et al.] // J.
Natl. Cancer Inst. – 2007. – Vol. 99, N15. – Р. 1171-1177.392. Untapped potential of observational research to inform clinical decision making:American Society of Clinical Oncology Research Statement / К. Visvanathan [etal.] // J. Clin. Oncol. – 2017. – N 35. – Р. 1845-1854.393. Update on current care guidelines: benign prostatic hyperplasia / Т. Tammela [etal.] // Duodecim. – 2012. – Vol. 128, N 10.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
