ČESKÁ UROLOGIE / CZECH UROLOGY – 3 / 2019

201 PŘEHLEDOVÝ ČLÁNEK Ces Urol 2019; 23(3): 194–202 27. Lin DW, Newcomb LF, Brown MD, et al. Evaluating the Four Kallikrein Panel of the 4Kscore for Pre‑ diction of High‑grade Prostate Cancer in Men in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study. Eur Urol 2017; 72: 448-454 28. Tomlins SA, Day JR, Lonigro RJ, et al. Urine TMPRSS2:ERG plus PCA3 for individualized prostate cancer risk assessment. Eur Urol. 2016; 70(1): 45–53. 29. Van Neste L, Hendriks RJ, Dijkstra S, et al. Detection of high-grade prostate cancer using a urinary molecular biomarker-based risk score. Eur. Urol. 2016; 70(5): 740–748. 30. McKiernan J, Donovan MJ, O´Neill V, et al. A novel urine exosome gene expression assay to predict high grade prostate cancer at initial biopsy. JAMA 2016; 2(7): 882–889. 31. Klein EA, Cooperberg MR, Magi‑Galluzzi C, et al. A 17-gene assay to predict prostate cancer aggre‑ ssiveness in the context of Gleason grade heterogeneity, tumor multifocality, and biopsy undersampling. Eur Urol. 2014; 66(3): 550–560. 32. Crawford ED, Scholz MC, Kar AJ, et al. Cell cycle progression score and treatment decisions in prostate cancer: results from an ongoing registry. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014; 30(6): 1025–1031. 33. Wyatt AW, Azad AA, Volik SV, et al. Genomic alterations in cell-free DNA and Enzalutamide resistence in castration-resistant prostate cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2016; 2(12): 1598–1606. 34. Crawford ED, Rove KO, Trabulsi EJ, et al. Diagnostic performance of PCA3 to detect prostate cancer in men with increased prostate specific antigen: a prospective study of 1,962 cases. J Urol. 2012; 188(5): 1726–1731. 35. Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, et al. Active surveillance for low‑risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 597–603. 36. Ross AE, Loeb S, Landis P, et al. Prostate‑specific antigen kinetics during follow‑up are an unreliable trigger for intervention in a prostate cancer surveillance program. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 2810–2816. 37. San Francisco IF, Werner L, Regan MM, et al. Risk stratification and validation of prostate specific an‑ tigen density as independent predictor of progression in men with low risk prostate cancer during active surveillance. J Urol 2011; 185: 471–476. 38. Whitson JM, Porten SP, Hilton JF, et al. The relationship between prostate specific antigen change and biopsy progression in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol 2011; 185: 1656–1660 39. Dall’Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, et al. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer 2008; 112: 2664–2670. 40. Barayan GA, Brimo F, Begin LR, et al. Factors influencing disease progression of prostate cancer under active surveillance: a McGill University Health Center cohort. BJU Int 2014; 114: E99–E104. 41. Tosoian JJ, Loeb S, Feng Z, et al. Association of [-2]proPSA with Biopsy Reclassification During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2012; 188: 1131–1136. 42. Hirama H, Sugimoto M, Ito K, et al. The impact of baseline [-2]proPSA‑related indices on the predic‑ tion of pathological reclassification at 1 year during active surveillance for low‑risk prostate cancer: the Japanese multicenter study cohort. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2014; 140: 257–263. 43. Ankerst DP, Xia J, Thompson IM, Jr, et al. Precision Medicine in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Development of the Canary‑Early Detection Research Network Active Surveillance Biopsy Risk Calculator. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 1083–1088. 44. Mamawala MM, Rao K, Landis P, et al. Risk prediction tool for grade re‑classification in men with favourable‑risk prostate cancer on active surveillance. BJU Int 2017; 120: 25–31. 45. Loeb S. Shift from protocol‑based to personalized medicine in active surveillance: beginning of a new era. BJU Int 2017; 120: 3–4. 46. N Mottet RCN, van den Bergh, E Briers, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Barcelona 2019. ISBN 978-94-92671-05-9.