Timo Soeterik

177 General Discussion and Future Perspectives 17. Moore CM, Giganti F, Albertsen P, et al. Reporting Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The PRECISE Recommendations—A Report of a European School of Oncology Task Force. Eur Urol . 2017;71:648-655. 18. Stavrinides V, Giganti F, Trock B, et al. Five-year Outcomes of Magnetic Resonance Imaging–based Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Large Cohort Study. Eur Urol . 2020;78:443-451. 19. Ploussard G, Beauval JB, Lesourd M, et al. Added Value of Concomitant Systematic and Fusion Targeted Biopsies for Grade Group Prediction Based on Radical Prostatectomy Final Pathology on Positive Magnetic Resonance Imaging. J Urol . 2019;202:1182-1187. 20. Ahdoot M, Wilbur AR, Reese SE, et al. MRI- Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med . 2020;382:917-928. 21. Dell’Oglio P, Stabile A, Dias BH, et al. Impact of multiparametric MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy on pre-therapeutic risk assessment in prostate cancer patients candidate for radical prostatectomy. World J Urol . 2019;37:221-234. 22. Gandaglia G, Ploussard G, Valerio M, et al. The Key Combined Value of Multiparametric Magnet ic Resonance Imaging, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging–targeted and Concomitant Systematic Biopsies for the Prediction of Adverse Pathological Features in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatect. Eur Urol . 2020;77:733-741. 23. 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. 24. 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. 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. Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet . 2020;395:1208-1216. 27. Yaxley JW, Raveenthiran S, Nouhaud F-X, et al. Yaxley - Outcomes of primary lymph node staging of intermediate and high risk prostate cancer with gallium PSMA.pdf. J Urol . 2019;201:815-820. 28. Van Kalmthout LWM, Van Melick HHE, Lavalaye J, et al. Prospective validation of Gallium-68 PSMA PET/CT in primary staging of prostate cancer patients. J Urol . 2020;203:537-545. 29. Jansen BHE, Bodar YJL, Zwezerijnen GJC, et al. Pelvic lymph-node staging with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT prior to extended pelvic lymph-node dissection in primary prostate cancer - the SALT trial -. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging . 2021;48:509-520. 30. Meijer D, De Barros H, Bodar YJL, et al. The Predictive Value of Preoperative Negative Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography Imaging for Lymph Node Metastatic Prostate Cancer. J Urol . 2021;205:1655-1662. 31. Vickers AJ, Fearn P, Scardino PT, Kattan MW. Why Can’t Nomograms Be More Like Netflix? Urology . 2010;75:511-513. 32. 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 Intern Med . 2015;162:1-73. 10