Timo Soeterik

152 CHAPTER 8 16. Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N, et al. The Template of the Primary Lymphatic Landing Sites of the Prostate Should Be Revisited: Results of a Multimodality Mapping Study. Eur Urol . 2008;53:118-125. 17. Berney DM, Wheeler TM, Grignon DJ, et al. International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. working group 4: Seminal vesicles and lymph nodes. Mod Pathol . 2011;24:39-47. 18. Moons KGM, Altman DG, Reitsma JB, et al. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): Explanation and elaboration. Ann InternMed . 2015;162:W1-W73. 19. Verbakel JY, Steyerberg EW, Uno H, et al. ROC curves for clinical prediction models part 1. ROC plots showed no added value above the AUC when evaluating the performance of clinical prediction models. J Clin Epidemiol . 2020;126:207-216. 20. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision Curve Analysis: A Novel Method for Evaluating Prediction Models. Med Decis Mak . 2006;26:565-574. 21. Van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R. J Stat Softw . 2011;45:1-67. 22. Porpiglia F, Manfredi M, Mele F, et al. Indication to pelvic lymph nodes dissection for prostate cancer: The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging when the risk of lymph nodes invasion according to Briganti updated nomogram is <5%. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis . 2018;21:85-91. 23. Huang C, Song G, Wang H, et al. Preoperative PI-RADS Version 2 scores helps improve accuracy of clinical nomograms for predicting pelvic lymph node metastasis at radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis . 2020;23:116-126. 24. Gandaglia G, Ploussard G, Valerio M, et al. A Novel Nomogram to Identify Candidates for Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Among Patients with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Diagnosed with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Biopsies. Eur Urol . 2019;75:506-514. 25. Draulans C, Everaerts W, Isebaert S, et al. Development and External Validation of a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and International Society of Urological Pathology Based Add-On Prediction Tool to Identify Prostate Cancer Candidates for Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection. J Urol . 2020;203:713-718. 26. Gandaglia G, Martini A, Ploussard G, et al. External Validation of the 2019 Briganti Nomogram for the Identification of Prostate Cancer Patients Who Should Be Considered for an Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection. Eur Urol . 2020;78:138-142. 27. Paner GP, Stadler WM, Hansel DE, Montironi R, Lin DW, Amin MB. Updates in the Eighth Edition of the Tumor-Node-Metastasis Staging Classification for Urologic Cancers. Eur Urol . 2018;73:560-569. 28. Soeterik TFW, van Melick HH., Dijksman LM, Biesma DH, Witjes JA, van Basten J-PA. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Should Be Preferred Over Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Local Staging and Disease Risk Classification. Urology . 2020:1-8. 29. Angulo JC, Montie JE, Bukowsky T, et al. Interobserver consistency of digital rectal examination in clinical staging of localized prostatic carcinoma. Urol Oncol Semin Orig Investig . 1995;1:199-205.