A comparative performance analysis of total prostate‐specific antigen, percentage free prostate‐specific antigen, prostate‐specific antigen velocity and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 in the first, second and third repeat prostate biopsy
Study Type – Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA de...
Saved in:
Published in | BJU international Vol. 109; no. 11; pp. 1627 - 1635 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Oxford, UK
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
01.06.2012
Wiley-Blackwell Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1464-4096 1464-410X 1464-410X |
DOI | 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10584.x |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Study Type – Diagnosis (exploratory cohort)
Level of Evidence 2b
What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?
Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings.
In a head‐to‐head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsies.
OBJECTIVE
•
To compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate‐specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and ≥ third repeat biopsy session.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
•
Patients (n= 127) aged ≤70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age‐specific total PSA levels (2.5–6.5 ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs]≥ two cores affected by high‐grade prostatic intra‐epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or ≥ third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12‐ or 24‐core biopsy scheme.
•
PSAV (≥ three values collected over ≥12 months) was calculated using the log‐slope method. PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay®.
•
After stratification according to the number of previous biopsies (first, second and ≥ third), calculation of specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the proportion of avoided unnecessary repeat biopsies (PAB) compared with tPSA at fixed sensitivity thresholds (75, 85 and 95%) were performed.
•
Finally, accuracy estimates (area under the curve [AUC]) were quantified for each repeat biopsy scenario.
RESULTS
•
At repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%.
•
At first repeat biopsy, PCA3 predicted PCa best (AUC = 0.80) and would have avoided 72.2% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA.
•
At second repeat biopsy, %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and would have avoided 66.7% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA.
•
At ≥ third repeat biopsy, again %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.70) and would have avoided 45.0% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA.
•
The main limitation of our study resides in its small sample size.
CONCLUSIONS
•
The findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors.
•
Total PSA was no significant risk factor in the entire analysis. By contrast, %fPSA performed best at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. PSAV's diagnostic potential was reserved to patients at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy.
•
Finally, PCA3 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy and potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies at first repeat biopsy. However, this advantage dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Study Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings. In a head-to-head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsies.UNLABELLEDStudy Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings. In a head-to-head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsies.To compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and ≥ third repeat biopsy session.OBJECTIVETo compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and ≥ third repeat biopsy session.Patients (n= 127) aged ≤70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age-specific total PSA levels (2.5-6.5 ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs]≥ two cores affected by high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or ≥ third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12- or 24-core biopsy scheme. PSAV (≥ three values collected over ≥12 months) was calculated using the log-slope method. PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay®. After stratification according to the number of previous biopsies (first, second and ≥ third), calculation of specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the proportion of avoided unnecessary repeat biopsies (PAB) compared with tPSA at fixed sensitivity thresholds (75, 85 and 95%) were performed. Finally, accuracy estimates (area under the curve [AUC]) were quantified for each repeat biopsy scenario.PATIENTS AND METHODSPatients (n= 127) aged ≤70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age-specific total PSA levels (2.5-6.5 ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs]≥ two cores affected by high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or ≥ third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12- or 24-core biopsy scheme. PSAV (≥ three values collected over ≥12 months) was calculated using the log-slope method. PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay®. After stratification according to the number of previous biopsies (first, second and ≥ third), calculation of specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the proportion of avoided unnecessary repeat biopsies (PAB) compared with tPSA at fixed sensitivity thresholds (75, 85 and 95%) were performed. Finally, accuracy estimates (area under the curve [AUC]) were quantified for each repeat biopsy scenario.At repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%. At first repeat biopsy, PCA3 predicted PCa best (AUC = 0.80) and would have avoided 72.2% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. At second repeat biopsy, %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and would have avoided 66.7% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. At ≥ third repeat biopsy, again %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.70) and would have avoided 45.0% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. The main limitation of our study resides in its small sample size.RESULTSAt repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%. At first repeat biopsy, PCA3 predicted PCa best (AUC = 0.80) and would have avoided 72.2% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. At second repeat biopsy, %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and would have avoided 66.7% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. At ≥ third repeat biopsy, again %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.70) and would have avoided 45.0% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. The main limitation of our study resides in its small sample size.The findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors. Total PSA was no significant risk factor in the entire analysis. By contrast, %fPSA performed best at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. PSAV's diagnostic potential was reserved to patients at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. Finally, PCA3 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy and potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies at first repeat biopsy. However, this advantage dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy.CONCLUSIONSThe findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors. Total PSA was no significant risk factor in the entire analysis. By contrast, %fPSA performed best at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. PSAV's diagnostic potential was reserved to patients at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. Finally, PCA3 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy and potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies at first repeat biopsy. However, this advantage dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. Study Type – Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings. In a head‐to‐head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsies. OBJECTIVE • To compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate‐specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and ≥ third repeat biopsy session. PATIENTS AND METHODS • Patients (n= 127) aged ≤70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age‐specific total PSA levels (2.5–6.5 ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs]≥ two cores affected by high‐grade prostatic intra‐epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or ≥ third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12‐ or 24‐core biopsy scheme. • PSAV (≥ three values collected over ≥12 months) was calculated using the log‐slope method. PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay®. • After stratification according to the number of previous biopsies (first, second and ≥ third), calculation of specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the proportion of avoided unnecessary repeat biopsies (PAB) compared with tPSA at fixed sensitivity thresholds (75, 85 and 95%) were performed. • Finally, accuracy estimates (area under the curve [AUC]) were quantified for each repeat biopsy scenario. RESULTS • At repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%. • At first repeat biopsy, PCA3 predicted PCa best (AUC = 0.80) and would have avoided 72.2% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. • At second repeat biopsy, %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and would have avoided 66.7% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. • At ≥ third repeat biopsy, again %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.70) and would have avoided 45.0% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. • The main limitation of our study resides in its small sample size. CONCLUSIONS • The findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors. • Total PSA was no significant risk factor in the entire analysis. By contrast, %fPSA performed best at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. PSAV's diagnostic potential was reserved to patients at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. • Finally, PCA3 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy and potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies at first repeat biopsy. However, this advantage dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. Study Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings. In a head-to-head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsies. OBJECTIVE * To compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and ≥ third repeat biopsy session. PATIENTS AND METHODS * Patients (n= 127) aged ≤70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age-specific total PSA levels (2.5-6.5ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs]≥ two cores affected by high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or ≥ third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12- or 24-core biopsy scheme. * PSAV (≥ three values collected over ≥12 months) was calculated using the log-slope method. PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay. * After stratification according to the number of previous biopsies (first, second and ≥ third), calculation of specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the proportion of avoided unnecessary repeat biopsies (PAB) compared with tPSA at fixed sensitivity thresholds (75, 85 and 95%) were performed. * Finally, accuracy estimates (area under the curve [AUC]) were quantified for each repeat biopsy scenario. RESULTS * At repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%. * At first repeat biopsy, PCA3 predicted PCa best (AUC = 0.80) and would have avoided 72.2% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. * At second repeat biopsy, %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and would have avoided 66.7% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. * At ≥ third repeat biopsy, again %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.70) and would have avoided 45.0% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. * The main limitation of our study resides in its small sample size. CONCLUSIONS * The findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors. * Total PSA was no significant risk factor in the entire analysis. By contrast, %fPSA performed best at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. PSAV's diagnostic potential was reserved to patients at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. * Finally, PCA3 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy and potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies at first repeat biopsy. However, this advantage dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] Study Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings. In a head-to-head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsies. To compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and ≥ third repeat biopsy session. Patients (n= 127) aged ≤70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age-specific total PSA levels (2.5-6.5 ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs]≥ two cores affected by high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or ≥ third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12- or 24-core biopsy scheme. PSAV (≥ three values collected over ≥12 months) was calculated using the log-slope method. PCA3 scores were assessed using the Progensa assay®. After stratification according to the number of previous biopsies (first, second and ≥ third), calculation of specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the proportion of avoided unnecessary repeat biopsies (PAB) compared with tPSA at fixed sensitivity thresholds (75, 85 and 95%) were performed. Finally, accuracy estimates (area under the curve [AUC]) were quantified for each repeat biopsy scenario. At repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%. At first repeat biopsy, PCA3 predicted PCa best (AUC = 0.80) and would have avoided 72.2% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. At second repeat biopsy, %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and would have avoided 66.7% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. At ≥ third repeat biopsy, again %fPSA demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.70) and would have avoided 45.0% of repeat biopsies (75% sensitivity) compared with tPSA. The main limitation of our study resides in its small sample size. The findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors. Total PSA was no significant risk factor in the entire analysis. By contrast, %fPSA performed best at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. PSAV's diagnostic potential was reserved to patients at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. Finally, PCA3 demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy and potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies at first repeat biopsy. However, this advantage dissipated at second and ≥ third repeat biopsy. Level of Evidence2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing diagnostic accuracy of each single risk factor (e.g. DRE, tPSA, %fPSA, complexed PSA, PSA density or PSAV] with increasing number of prostate biopsy sessions. PCA3 shows impressive diagnostic performance in the initial and early repeat biopsy settings. In a head-to-head comparison we demonstrate the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy session strongly influences performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors, including PCA3. While the novel diagnostic marker would have avoided a considerable number of unnecessary biopsies in the first repeat biopsy scenario, its effects dissipated at second and greater than or equal to third repeat biopsies. times To compare the performance characteristics of prostate cancer risk factors such as total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), percentage free PSA (%fPSA), PSA velocity (PSAV) and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) at first, second and greater than or equal to third repeat biopsy session. times Patients (n= 127) aged less than or equal to 70 years, with suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or persistently elevated age-specific total PSA levels (2.5-6.5ng/mL) and/or suspicious prior histology (atypical small acinar proliferations [ASAPs] greater than or equal to two cores affected by high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia [HGPIN]) undergoing either a first, second, or greater than or equal to third repeat biopsy were investigated using a 12- or 24-core biopsy scheme. times The findings of the present study promote the concept that the number of previous repeat biopsy sessions strongly influences the performance characteristics of biopsy risk factors.Original Abstract: Study Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) times At repeat biopsy, overall prostate cancer (PCa) detection was 34.6%. |
Author | Augustin, Herbert Kluth, Luis Fisch, Margit Auprich, Marco Graefen, Markus Chun, Felix K.‐H. Budäus, Lars Shariat, Shahrokh F. Pummer, Karl Mannweiler, Sebastian |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Marco surname: Auprich fullname: Auprich, Marco – sequence: 2 givenname: Herbert surname: Augustin fullname: Augustin, Herbert – sequence: 3 givenname: Lars surname: Budäus fullname: Budäus, Lars – sequence: 4 givenname: Luis surname: Kluth fullname: Kluth, Luis – sequence: 5 givenname: Sebastian surname: Mannweiler fullname: Mannweiler, Sebastian – sequence: 6 givenname: Shahrokh F. surname: Shariat fullname: Shariat, Shahrokh F. – sequence: 7 givenname: Margit surname: Fisch fullname: Fisch, Margit – sequence: 8 givenname: Markus surname: Graefen fullname: Graefen, Markus – sequence: 9 givenname: Karl surname: Pummer fullname: Pummer, Karl – sequence: 10 givenname: Felix K.‐H. surname: Chun fullname: Chun, Felix K.‐H. |
BackLink | http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=25918760$$DView record in Pascal Francis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21939492$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNqNks1q3DAUhU1JaX7aVyiCUugi40qWZMubQhr6S6CbBroTsuY60eCxXElO410foc_YV-gL9DqZSSBQOtpISN-5R9x7DrO93veQZYTRnOF6vcqZKMVCMPotLyhjOaNSifz6UXZw97C3PdO63M8OY1xRihelfJLtF6zmtaiLg-zPCbF-PZhgkrsCMkBofVib3gIxvemm6CLxLUk-mY4MwcdkEvz--SsOYF3rLFLJXUB_PEst9MlcAGkDwH_gfz-SK-i8dWnCiyUZg-tNmO4ExM5_CwRBIJy4nqRLNHQhpmMSwXrUzLp06cKSBBjApHtx4_wQp6fZ49Z0EZ5t9qPs_P27r6cfF2dfPnw6PTlbWFEysVBWNlQuC9Pypm4qymolZK1MZQUtQVay4MyYhqmmMA0vFTXMgqCKVpVkvOT8KHt1Wxf9v48Qk167aKHrTA9-jJoVSlIlimoHFIeMMK8ooi8eoCs_BpwVUlxyLmopFVLPN9TYrGGph-DW2Ee9nTwCLzeAidZ0bcC-unjPyZqpqpzt3txyFpsYA7QaZ4Nh8X0KxnX4Mz1HUq_0nDY9J0_PkdQ3kdTXWEA9KLD12EG68f7hOph21um3n89vjvwv6dP_6w |
CODEN | BJINFO |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ucl_2015_08_003 crossref_primary_10_1515_cclm_2019_0693 crossref_primary_10_1097_MD_0000000000033388 crossref_primary_10_1111_bju_13314 crossref_primary_10_1111_bju_14041 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_semcancer_2018_01_012 crossref_primary_10_3390_ijms22094367 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_microc_2025_113218 crossref_primary_10_3389_fonc_2021_605606 crossref_primary_10_1097_MOU_0000000000000315 crossref_primary_10_2174_1381612826666200218104921 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_kjms_2015_02_006 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_acuroe_2016_12_002 crossref_primary_10_3390_cancers13092047 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_tem_2013_12_007 crossref_primary_10_3390_ijms140611034 crossref_primary_10_1177_1054773818757311 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_urology_2013_06_081 crossref_primary_10_3390_biomedicines8060173 crossref_primary_10_1038_nrurol_2015_159 crossref_primary_10_2174_0929867329666220607162250 crossref_primary_10_1080_14737140_2018_1502086 crossref_primary_10_4103_0366_6999_186635 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_eururo_2012_09_033 crossref_primary_10_1007_s15006_012_0035_1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s13277_013_0739_6 crossref_primary_10_5858_arpa_2017_0185_OA crossref_primary_10_1016_j_acuro_2016_06_006 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jelechem_2016_12_010 crossref_primary_10_1016_S1166_7087_13_70048_4 crossref_primary_10_11648_j_ijcu_20250901_17 crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1464_410X_2012_11607_x crossref_primary_10_1590_S1677_5538_IBJU_2014_04_06 crossref_primary_10_17650_1726_9776_2020_16_3_165_173 crossref_primary_10_4081_oncol_2020_449 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_urology_2012_11_069 crossref_primary_10_3310_hta19870 crossref_primary_10_3389_fgene_2019_00014 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_urology_2013_09_075 crossref_primary_10_3109_21681805_2014_949841 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cca_2014_04_025 crossref_primary_10_1002_cncr_29611 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ucl_2013_07_012 crossref_primary_10_1159_000355355 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_pharmthera_2021_107932 crossref_primary_10_1373_clinchem_2012_195560 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_juro_2013_02_005 crossref_primary_10_1155_2014_676572 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_urology_2015_08_005 |
Cites_doi | 10.1097/01.ju.0000119667.86071.e7 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66083-1 10.6004/jnccn.2010.0016 10.1016/j.urology.2006.12.014 10.1016/j.urology.2006.09.040 10.1186/1471-2490-9-7 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.038 10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.029 10.1016/S0210-4806(09)74110-5 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.003 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09286.x 10.1097/01.ju.0000132134.10470.75 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09330.x 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.039 10.1056/NEJMoa021659 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.12.017 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.04.015 10.1056/NEJM199608013350511 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.071 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64279-6 10.1080/03008880510030923 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4969 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)68187-4 10.1373/clinchem.2005.063289 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67994-3 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.007 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.03.026 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65652-2 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.043 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.041 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00409-6 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09362.x |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2011 THE AUTHORS; BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL 2015 INIST-CNRS 2011 THE AUTHORS; BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2011 THE AUTHORS; BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL – notice: 2015 INIST-CNRS – notice: 2011 THE AUTHORS; BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL. |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION IQODW CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7QP 7X8 8FD FR3 P64 RC3 |
DOI | 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10584.x |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Pascal-Francis Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic Technology Research Database Engineering Research Database Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Genetics Abstracts |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic Genetics Abstracts Engineering Research Database Technology Research Database Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts MEDLINE Genetics Abstracts |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1464-410X |
EndPage | 1635 |
ExternalDocumentID | 2975456851 21939492 25918760 10_1111_j_1464_410X_2011_10584_x BJU10584 |
Genre | article Controlled Clinical Trial Journal Article Comparative Study |
GroupedDBID | --- .3N .55 .GA .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 1OC 23N 24P 2WC 31~ 33P 36B 3O- 3SF 4.4 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52R 52S 52T 52U 52V 52W 52X 53G 5GY 5HH 5LA 5RE 5VS 66C 6P2 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A01 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHHS AAHQN AAIPD AAMNL AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABDBF ABEML ABJNI ABLJU ABOCM ABPVW ABQWH ABXGK ACAHQ ACCFJ ACCZN ACFBH ACGFS ACGOF ACMXC ACPOU ACPRK ACSCC ACUHS ACXBN ACXQS ADBBV ADBTR ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEQDE AEUQT AEUYR AFBPY AFEBI AFFNX AFFPM AFGKR AFPWT AFWVQ AFZJQ AHBTC AHMBA AIACR AITYG AIURR AIWBW AJBDE ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ATUGU AZBYB AZVAB BAFTC BAWUL BFHJK BHBCM BMXJE BROTX BRXPI BY8 C45 CAG COF CS3 D-6 D-7 D-E D-F DCZOG DIK DPXWK DR2 DRFUL DRMAN DRSTM DU5 E3Z EAD EAP EBC EBD EBS EJD EMB EMK EMOBN ESX EX3 F00 F01 F04 F5P FUBAC G-S G.N GODZA H.X HF~ HGLYW HZI HZ~ IHE IX1 J0M J5H K48 KBYEO LATKE LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRMAN MRSTM MSFUL MSMAN MSSTM MXFUL MXMAN MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ O66 O9- OIG OK1 OVD P2P P2W P2X P2Z P4B P4D PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 R.K RJQFR ROL RX1 SUPJJ SV3 TEORI TUS UB1 V9Y W8V W99 WBKPD WHWMO WIH WIJ WIK WOHZO WOW WQJ WRC WVDHM WXI WXSBR X7M XG1 YFH ZGI ZXP ~IA ~WT AAYXX AEYWJ AGHNM AGYGG CITATION AAMMB AEFGJ AGXDD AIDQK AIDYY IQODW CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7QP 7X8 8FD FR3 P64 RC3 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4614-8c5b05d2af3b9b701984598a7c406e575231aab18b2ab3680a1ce408077513633 |
IEDL.DBID | DR2 |
ISSN | 1464-4096 1464-410X |
IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 02:06:22 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 06:47:45 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 25 06:18:05 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 05:59:32 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 09:14:59 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 03:49:53 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:10:04 EDT 2025 Wed Jan 22 16:51:50 EST 2025 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 11 |
Keywords | Nephrology Prostate disease percentage free PSA Free form Tumoral marker PSA velocity Urology Prostate specific antigen PCA3 gene Performance analysis Urogenital system Male genital diseases Repetition Urine Urinary system disease urinary prostate cancer gene 3 Malignant tumor Velocity Anatomic pathology Biopsy Total repeat prostate biopsy Kinetics Prostate cancer Prostate total PSA Comparative study Cancer |
Language | English |
License | CC BY 4.0 2011 THE AUTHORS; BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4614-8c5b05d2af3b9b701984598a7c406e575231aab18b2ab3680a1ce408077513633 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
PMID | 21939492 |
PQID | 1353349558 |
PQPubID | 1026371 |
PageCount | 9 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_1285084273 proquest_miscellaneous_1011850370 proquest_journals_1353349558 pubmed_primary_21939492 pascalfrancis_primary_25918760 crossref_citationtrail_10_1111_j_1464_410X_2011_10584_x crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1464_410X_2011_10584_x wiley_primary_10_1111_j_1464_410X_2011_10584_x_BJU10584 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | June 2012 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2012-06-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 06 year: 2012 text: June 2012 |
PublicationDecade | 2010 |
PublicationPlace | Oxford, UK |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Oxford, UK – name: Oxford – name: England – name: Edgecliff |
PublicationTitle | BJU international |
PublicationTitleAlternate | BJU Int |
PublicationYear | 2012 |
Publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd Wiley-Blackwell Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
Publisher_xml | – name: Blackwell Publishing Ltd – name: Wiley-Blackwell – name: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
References | 2001; 166 1997; 158 2006; 52 2006; 50 2010; 58 2010; 106 2005; 216 2008; 14 2008; 54 2010; 184 2007; 52 2005; 48 2008; 71 2009; 55 2009; 33 2003; 349 2002; 168 2007; 177 2004; 172 2004; 171 2009; 9 2000; 163 2008; 179 1996; 335 2003; 62 2007; 69 2010; 8 e_1_2_7_5_2 e_1_2_7_4_2 e_1_2_7_3_2 e_1_2_7_2_2 e_1_2_7_9_2 e_1_2_7_8_2 e_1_2_7_7_2 e_1_2_7_6_2 e_1_2_7_19_2 e_1_2_7_18_2 e_1_2_7_17_2 e_1_2_7_16_2 e_1_2_7_15_2 e_1_2_7_14_2 e_1_2_7_13_2 e_1_2_7_12_2 e_1_2_7_11_2 e_1_2_7_10_2 e_1_2_7_26_2 e_1_2_7_27_2 e_1_2_7_28_2 e_1_2_7_29_2 e_1_2_7_25_2 e_1_2_7_24_2 e_1_2_7_30_2 e_1_2_7_23_2 e_1_2_7_31_2 e_1_2_7_22_2 e_1_2_7_32_2 e_1_2_7_21_2 e_1_2_7_33_2 e_1_2_7_20_2 |
References_xml | – volume: 172 start-page: 94 year: 2004 end-page: 7 article-title: Prostate cancer detection with office based saturation biopsy in a repeat biopsy population publication-title: J Urol – volume: 33 start-page: 113 year: 2009 end-page: 26 article-title: [EAU guidelines on prostate cancer] publication-title: Actas Urol Esp – volume: 163 start-page: 158 year: 2000 end-page: 62 article-title: Extensive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in patients with previous benign sextant biopsies publication-title: J Urol – volume: 168 start-page: 1990 year: 2002 end-page: 3 article-title: The accuracy of the increased prostate specific antigen level (greater than or equal to 20 ng./ml.) in predicting prostate cancer: is biopsy always required? publication-title: J Urol – volume: 166 start-page: 86 year: 2001 end-page: 91 article-title: Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies publication-title: J Urol – volume: 52 start-page: 1089 year: 2006 end-page: 95 article-title: APTIMA PCA3 molecular urine test: development of a method to aid in the diagnosis of prostate cancer publication-title: Clin Chem – volume: 8 start-page: 240 year: 2010 end-page: 62 article-title: NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer early detection publication-title: J Natl Compr Canc Netw – volume: 71 start-page: 399 year: 2008 end-page: 403 article-title: Saturation prostate biopsy in high risk patients after multiple previous negative biopsies publication-title: Urology – volume: 50 start-page: 498 year: 2006 end-page: 505 article-title: High incidence of prostate cancer detected by saturation biopsy after previous negative biopsy series publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 9 start-page: 7 year: 2009 article-title: Development and validation of risk score for predicting positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy in a UK population publication-title: BMC Urol – volume: 184 start-page: 907 year: 2010 end-page: 12 article-title: Prostate specific antigen velocity does not aid prostate cancer detection in men with prior negative biopsy publication-title: J Urol – volume: 177 start-page: 2106 year: 2007 end-page: 31 article-title: Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update publication-title: J Urol – volume: 349 start-page: 335 year: 2003 end-page: 42 article-title: Effect of verification bias on screening for prostate cancer by measurement of prostate‐specific antigen publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 179 start-page: 1587 year: 2008 end-page: 92 article-title: PCA3: a molecular urine assay for predicting prostate biopsy outcome publication-title: J Urol – volume: 166 start-page: 1679 year: 2001 end-page: 83 article-title: Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? publication-title: J Urol – volume: 58 start-page: 851 year: 2010 end-page: 64 article-title: Optimizing performance and interpretation of prostate biopsy: a critical analysis of the literature publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 54 start-page: 1081 year: 2008 end-page: 8 article-title: Clinical utility of the PCA3 urine assay in European men scheduled for repeat biopsy publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 14 start-page: 3785 year: 2008 end-page: 91 article-title: Improved prediction of disease relapse after radical prostatectomy through a panel of preoperative blood‐based biomarkers publication-title: Clin Cancer Res – volume: 335 start-page: 345 year: 1996 end-page: 6 article-title: Age‐specific reference ranges for serum PSA publication-title: N Engl J Med – volume: 106 start-page: 1143 year: 2010 end-page: 7 article-title: The prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) urine test in men with previous negative biopsies: does free‐to‐total prostate‐specific antigen ratio influence the performance of the PCA3 score in predicting positive biopsies? publication-title: BJU Int – volume: 69 start-page: 108 year: 2007 end-page: 12 article-title: Use of prostate‐specific antigen velocity to follow up patients with isolated high‐grade prostatic intra‐epithelial neoplasia on prostate biopsy publication-title: Urology – volume: 216 start-page: 20 year: 2005 end-page: 33 article-title: Prognostic and predictive factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in prostate needle biopsy specimens publication-title: Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl – volume: 106 start-page: 1138 year: 2010 end-page: 42 article-title: Follow‐up of men with an elevated PCA3 score and a negative biopsy: does an elevated PCA3 score indeed predict the presence of prostate cancer? publication-title: BJU Int – volume: 52 start-page: 1044 year: 2007 end-page: 50 article-title: Methods of calculating prostate‐specific antigen velocity publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 158 start-page: 2162 year: 1997 end-page: 7 article-title: Serum free prostate specific antigen and prostate specific antigen density measurements for predicting cancer in men with prior negative prostatic biopsies publication-title: J Urol – volume: 55 start-page: 600 year: 2009 end-page: 6 article-title: Prostate cancer detection rate in patients with repeated extended 21‐sample needle biopsy publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 62 start-page: 456 year: 2003 end-page: 60 article-title: An artificial neural network to predict the outcome of repeat prostate biopsies publication-title: Urology – volume: 69 start-page: 532 year: 2007 end-page: 5 article-title: PCA3 molecular urine assay for prostate cancer in men undergoing repeat biopsy publication-title: Urology – volume: 106 start-page: 1309 year: 2010 end-page: 14 article-title: Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting a positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy session in the era of extended prostate sampling publication-title: BJU Int – volume: 48 start-page: 386 year: 2005 end-page: 99 article-title: Use of prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) isoforms for the detection of prostate cancer in men with a PSA level of 2–10 ng/ml: systematic review and meta‐analysis publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 52 start-page: 436 year: 2007 end-page: 44 article-title: Development and external validation of an extended 10‐core biopsy nomogram publication-title: Eur Urol – volume: 171 start-page: 1850 year: 2004 end-page: 4 article-title: Predictors of prostate cancer after initial negative systematic 12 core biopsy publication-title: J Urol – ident: e_1_2_7_29_2 doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000119667.86071.e7 – ident: e_1_2_7_25_2 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66083-1 – ident: e_1_2_7_14_2 doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2010.0016 – ident: e_1_2_7_23_2 doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.12.014 – ident: e_1_2_7_19_2 doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.09.040 – ident: e_1_2_7_20_2 doi: 10.1186/1471-2490-9-7 – ident: e_1_2_7_21_2 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.038 – ident: e_1_2_7_27_2 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.029 – ident: e_1_2_7_5_2 doi: 10.1016/S0210-4806(09)74110-5 – ident: e_1_2_7_15_2 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.003 – ident: e_1_2_7_24_2 doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09286.x – ident: e_1_2_7_31_2 doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000132134.10470.75 – ident: e_1_2_7_28_2 doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09330.x – ident: e_1_2_7_6_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.039 – ident: e_1_2_7_33_2 doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa021659 – ident: e_1_2_7_10_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.12.017 – ident: e_1_2_7_16_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.04.015 – ident: e_1_2_7_8_2 doi: 10.1056/NEJM199608013350511 – ident: e_1_2_7_22_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.071 – ident: e_1_2_7_9_2 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64279-6 – ident: e_1_2_7_12_2 doi: 10.1080/03008880510030923 – ident: e_1_2_7_13_2 doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4969 – ident: e_1_2_7_30_2 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)68187-4 – ident: e_1_2_7_11_2 doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2005.063289 – ident: e_1_2_7_18_2 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67994-3 – ident: e_1_2_7_2_2 doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.007 – ident: e_1_2_7_3_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.03.026 – ident: e_1_2_7_32_2 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65652-2 – ident: e_1_2_7_4_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.043 – ident: e_1_2_7_7_2 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.041 – ident: e_1_2_7_17_2 doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00409-6 – ident: e_1_2_7_26_2 doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09362.x |
SSID | ssj0014665 |
Score | 2.284819 |
Snippet | Study Type – Diagnosis (exploratory cohort)
Level of Evidence 2b
What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?
Risk factor assessment in the repeat... Study Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat... Study Type - Diagnosis (exploratory cohort) Level of Evidence2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat... Level of Evidence2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Risk factor assessment in the repeat biopsy setting is affected by a decreasing... |
SourceID | proquest pubmed pascalfrancis crossref wiley |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 1627 |
SubjectTerms | Accuracy Aged Antigens, Neoplasm - urine Biological and medical sciences Biopsy Biopsy, Needle Cohort Studies Digital Rectal Examination Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Humans Male Male genital diseases Medical sciences Middle Aged Neoplasia Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases percentage free PSA Predictive Value of Tests Prostate cancer prostate-specific antigen Prostate-Specific Antigen - blood Prostatic Neoplasms - metabolism Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology PSA velocity Rectum repeat prostate biopsy Risk Factors RNA, Messenger - genetics RNA, Messenger - metabolism ROC Curve total PSA Tumors Tumors of the urinary system urinary prostate cancer gene 3 Urinary tract. Prostate gland |
Title | A comparative performance analysis of total prostate‐specific antigen, percentage free prostate‐specific antigen, prostate‐specific antigen velocity and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 in the first, second and third repeat prostate biopsy |
URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fj.1464-410X.2011.10584.x https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21939492 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1353349558 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1011850370 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1285084273 |
Volume | 109 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3NatwwEBYlh1Io_f_ZNg0q9BgvtiWt5WNaGkIgPZQu7M1IskSXFNvYXmhzyiP0GfsKfYHOSF4vDmkbSm_GnjGSNRp9Y42-IeQNYwDClZaRTF0acZeaSJW5iAQsJmUiM5l4Mp2zD4uTJT9didWQ_4RnYQI_xPjDDWeG99c4wZXurk5yHvEkXgUmTkAKks8RT2LqFuKjjyOTFIj6qpJBBWD7NKnn2hdNVqq7jergo7lQ7eI6ODpFt355Or5PzrcdC1kp5_NNr-fm4grn4__p-QNyb0Cx9CiY3UNyy1aPyO2zYZ_-Mfl5RM2OVpw2u9MJVA0sKLR2tK8B-tMGD54A5P1x-R3PfWLuEkj1SBN6iKqYPwpej7rW2r8I__4hxdwoAyEH3CgpbjFA_0cFarBtLQVBSxldVxRwMXVrgMaHtMN_BqXX6z-v25K2toEVbKes13XTfXtClsfvP707iYbyEpHhAEoiaYSORZkqx3SukZZecpFLlRkAORZgLEBfpXQidao0W8hYJcZyQNhZJsDCGHtK9qq6ss_BlJRbCOYsqCGnmq9zGCtbipJblyo5I9nWlAozcK9jCZAvxSQG4wWOaYFjWvgxLb7OSDJqNoF_5AY6BxNrHRUh1IWmLeIZ2d-abzG4rK7AAigMwmUBrX09PgZngztIqrL1psN8QMB3McviP8ikICE5wOIZeRamxq4BEC7kPE_he3gDv3GXirenS3_54p81X5I7cD8NaX77ZK9vN_YVAMpeH3hX8QsPC20F |
linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3bbtQwELVQkQAJcb8slGIkHptVEtuJ81gu1VK6fUBdad8sx7HFiiqJkqwEPPEJfCO_wA8wk2SzSlWgQrxFyUzky9g-Y4_PEPKSMQDhOpWeDF3ocRcaT2eJ8AQsJlkgYxm0ZDrzk2i24EdLsezTAeFdmI4fYthww5HRztc4wHFD-vwo5x4P_GVHxQlQQfIpAMqrmOAb0xm8-TBwSYFsm1ey0wHgPg7rufBPo7XqZqlraDbX5bu4CJCO8W27QB3eJmebqnVxKZ-m6yadmq_nWB__U93vkFs9kKUHneXdJVdsfo9cm_dH9ffJzwNqtszitNxeUKC6J0KhhaNNAeiflnj3BFDvj2_f8eonhi-BVINMofuoiiGkMPFRV1n7F-Hff6QYHmXA64AXGcVTBmiAQYEaLFtFQdBSRlc5BWhM3QrQ8T6tcdsga_Waj6sqo5UtYRHbKqeroqy_PCCLw7enr2den2HCMxxwiSeNSH2RhdqxNEmRmV5ykUgdG8A5FpAsoF-t00CmoU5ZJH0dGMsBZMexCFjE2EOykxe5fQy2pF0kmLOghrRqbapDX9tMZNy6UMsJiTe2pExPv45ZQM7UyA3jCvtUYZ-qtk_V5wkJBs2yoyC5hM7eyFwHRfB2oWiRPyG7G_tV_axVK8yBwsBjFlDaF8NnmG_wEEnntljXGBIIEM9nsf8HmRAkJAdkPCGPurGxLQB4DAlPQmiP1sIvXSX16mjRPj75Z83n5PrsdH6sjt-dvH9KboBM2EX97ZKdplrbZ4Avm3SvnTd-AaMScR8 |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3bbtQwELVQkSokxP2yUIqReGxWSWwnzmO5rEqhFUKstG-W49jqqiiJkqzU8sQn8I38Aj_ATJLNKlWBCvEWJTORHc_YZ-LxGUJeMgYgXKfSk6ELPe5C4-ksEZ6AxSQLZCyDlkzn6Dg6mPPDhVj0-U94Fqbjhxh-uKFntPM1OniZuYtOzj0e-IuOiROQguRTwJPXeQS-gwDp00AlBbJtWclOB3D7OKvn0jeNlqqbpa7hq7mu3MVleHQMb9v1aXabnK571qWlnE5XTTo1Xy-QPv6frt8ht3oYS_c7u7tLrtn8Htk-6jfq75Of-9RseMVpuTmeQHVPg0ILR5sCsD8t8eQJYN4f377jwU9MXgKpBnlC91AVE0hh2qOusvYvwr9_SDE5ykDMATcyinsM0P9BgRpsW0VB0FJGlzkFYEzdErDxHq3xp0HW6jUnyyqjlS1hCdsop8uirM8fkPns7efXB15fX8IzHFCJJ41IfZGF2rE0SZGXXnKRSB0bQDkWcCxgX63TQKahTlkkfR0YywFix7EIWMTYQ7KVF7l9DKakXSSYs6CGpGptoUNf20xk3LpQywmJ16akTE--jjVAvqhREMYVjqnCMVXtmKqzCQkGzbIjILmCzu7IWgdFiHWhaZE_ITtr81X9nFUrrIDCIF4W0NoXw2OYbXALSee2WNWYEAgAz2ex_weZECQkB1w8IY8619g0AOKFhCchfI_WwK_cJfXqcN5ePvlnzedk--Obmfrw7vj9U3IDRMIu5W-HbDXVyj4DcNmku-2s8QsZJm_X |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A+comparative+performance+analysis+of+total+prostate%E2%80%90specific+antigen%2C+percentage+free+prostate%E2%80%90specific+antigen%2C+prostate%E2%80%90specific+antigen+velocity+and+urinary+prostate+cancer+gene+3+in+the+first%2C+second+and+third+repeat+prostate+biopsy&rft.jtitle=BJU+international&rft.au=Auprich%2C+Marco&rft.au=Augustin%2C+Herbert&rft.au=Bud%C3%A4us%2C+Lars&rft.au=Kluth%2C+Luis&rft.date=2012-06-01&rft.pub=Blackwell+Publishing+Ltd&rft.issn=1464-4096&rft.eissn=1464-410X&rft.volume=109&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1627&rft.epage=1635&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fj.1464-410X.2011.10584.x&rft.externalDBID=10.1111%252Fj.1464-410X.2011.10584.x&rft.externalDocID=BJU10584 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1464-4096&client=summon |