Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou JA, Bray F, Jemal A (2020) Recent global patterns in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol 77(1):38–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.08.005
Ilic D, Djulbegovic M, Jung JH, Hwang EC, Zhou Q, Cleves A et al (2018) Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 362:k3519. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3519
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Hayes JH, Barry MJ (2014) Screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test: a review of current evidence. JAMA 311(11):1143–1149. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.2085
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Gronberg H, Adolfsson J, Aly M, Nordstrom T, Wiklund P, Brandberg Y et al (2015) Prostate cancer screening in men aged 50–69 years (STHLM3): a prospective population-based diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 16(16):1667–1676. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00361-7
Hao S, Heintz E, Ostensson E, Discacciati A, Jaderling F, Gronberg H et al (2022) Cost-effectiveness of the Stockholm3 test and magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer screening: a microsimulation study. Eur Urol 82(1):12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.12.021
Elyan A, Saba K, Sigle A, Wetterauer C, Engesser C, Puschel H et al (2024) Prospective multicenter validation of the Stockholm3 test in a central European cohort. Eur Urol Focus 10(4):620–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2023.09.016
Nordstrom T, Discacciati A, Bergman M, Clements M, Aly M, Annerstedt M et al (2021) Prostate cancer screening using a combination of risk-prediction, MRI, and targeted prostate biopsies (STHLM3-MRI): a prospective, population-based, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol 22(9):1240–1249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00348-X
Tilki D, Rejek N, Nohe F, Haese A, Graefen M, Thederan I (2025) External validation of Stockholm3 in a Retrospective German Clinical Cohort. Eur Urol Focus 11(1):82–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.07.009
Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, Kranse R, Wolters T, van den Bergh RC, Bangma CH et al (2010) A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 57(1):79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.08.025
Gayet M, Mannaerts CK, Nieboer D, Beerlage HP, Wijkstra H, Mulders PFA et al (2018) Prediction of prostate cancer: external validation of the ERSPC risk calculator in a contemporary dutch clinical cohort. Eur Urol Focus 4(2):228–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.07.007
Palsdottir T, Gronberg H, Hilmisson A, Eklund M, Nordstrom T, Vigneswaran HT (2023) External validation of the rotterdam prostate cancer risk calculator and comparison with Stockholm3 for prostate cancer diagnosis in a Swedish population-based screening cohort. Eur Urol Focus 9(3):455–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.11.021
Hagens MJ, Stelwagen PJ, Veerman H, Rynja SP, Smeenge M, van der Noort V et al (2023) External validation of the Rotterdam prostate cancer risk calculator within a high-risk Dutch clinical cohort. World J Urol 41(1):13–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04185-y
Remmers S, Kasivisvanathan V, Verbeek JFM, Moore CM, Roobol MJ, Group ERSGPI (2022) Reducing biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging scans during the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer: applying the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer risk calculator to the PRECISION trial data. Eur Urol Open Sci 36:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.11.002
Marlow NM, Halpern MT, Pavluck AL, Ward EM, Chen AY (2010) Disparities associated with advanced prostate cancer stage at diagnosis. J Health Care Poor Underserved 21(1):112–131. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.0.0253
Pereira-Azevedo N, Verbeek JFM, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ (2018) Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome. Transl Androl Urol 7(1):18–26. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2017.12.21
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Brunckhorst O, Darraugh J et al (2024) EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2024 update. Part I: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 86(2):148–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.03.027
Maggi M, Panebianco V, Mosca A, Salciccia S, Gentilucci A, Di Pierro G et al (2020) Prostate imaging reporting and data system 3 category cases at multiparametric magnetic resonance for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus 6(3):463–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2019.06.014
Nguyen TA, Fourcade A, Zambon A, Saout K, Deruelle C, Joulin V et al (2023) Optimal PSA density threshold and predictive factors for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in patient with a PI-RADS 3 lesion on MRI. Urol Oncol 41(8):354 e11- e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.05.005
Cheng WC, Ng FC, Chan KC, Cheung YH, Chan WL, Wong SW (2004) Interobserver variation of prostatic volume estimation with digital rectal examination by urological staffs with different experiences. Int Braz J Urol 30(6):466–471. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-55382004000600003
Gosselaar C, Kranse R, Roobol MJ, Roemeling S, Schroder FH (2008) The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer. Prostate 68(9):985–993. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.20759
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Vigneswaran HT, Eklund M, Discacciati A, Nordstrom T, Hubbard RA, Perlis N et al (2024) Stockholm3 in a multiethnic cohort for prostate cancer detection (SEPTA): a prospective multicentered trial. J Clin Oncol 42(32):3806–3816. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.24.00152
Comments (0)