2020
Evaluation of the New American Urological Association Guidelines Risk Classification for Hematuria
Woldu S, Ng C, Loo R, Slezak J, Jacobsen S, Tan W, Kelly J, Lough T, Darling D, van Kessel K, de Jong J, van Criekinge W, Shariat S, Hiar A, Brown S, Boorjian S, Barocas D, Svatek R, Lotan Y. Evaluation of the New American Urological Association Guidelines Risk Classification for Hematuria. Journal Of Urology 2020, 205: 1387-1392. PMID: 33356483, DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000001550.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsIncidence of bladder cancerBladder cancerHigh-risk groupRisk groupsRisk strataCancer incidenceDegree of hematuriaHigh-risk patientsRisk stratification systemAmerican Urological AssociationEvaluation of patientsMultinational cohort studyRisk-stratified approachBladder cancer incidenceHematuria patientsClinically meaningful categoriesGross hematuriaUrologic evaluationIntermediate riskProspective registryRisk patientsContemporary patientsSmoking historyUrological AssociationHematuria
2019
Development and validation of a haematuria cancer risk score to identify patients at risk of harbouring cancer
Tan W, Ahmad A, Feber A, Mostafid H, Cresswell J, Fankhauser C, Waisbrod S, Hermanns T, Sasieni P, Kelly J, Khetrapal P, Baker H, Sridhar A, Lamb B, Ocampo F, McBain H, Baillie K, Middleton K, Watson D, Knight H, Maher S, Rane A, Pathmanathan B, Harmathova A, Hellawell G, Pelluri S, Pati J, Cossons A, Scott C, Madaan S, Bradfield S, Wakeford N, Dann A, Cook J, Cornwell M, Mills R, Thomas S, Reyner S, Vallejera G, Adeniran P, Masood S, Whotton N, Dent K, Pearson S, Hatton J, Newton M, Heeney E, Green K, Evans S, Rogers M, Gupwell K, Whiteley S, Brown A, McGrath J, Lunt N, Hill P, Sinclair A, Paredes‐Guerra A, Holbrook B, Ong E, Wardle H, Wilson D, Bayles A, Fennelly R, Tribbeck M, Ames K, Davies M, Taylor J, Edmunds E, Moore J, Mckinley S, Nolan T, Speed A, Tunnicliff A, Fossey G, Williams A, George M, Hutchins I, Einosas R, Richards A, Henderson A, Appleby B, Kehoe L, Gladwell L, Drakeley S, Davies J, Krishnan R, Roberts H, Main C, Jain S, Dumville J, Wilkinson N, Taylor J, Thomas F, Goulden K, Vinod C, Green E, Waymont C, Rogers J, Grant A, Carter V, Heap H, Lomas C, Cooke P, Scarratt L, Hodgkiss T, Johnstone D, Johnson J, Allsop J, Rothwell J, Connolly K, Cherian J, Ridgway S, Coulding M, Savill H, Mccormick J, Clark M, Collins G, Jewers K, Keith S, Bowen G, Hargreaves J, Riley K, Srirangam S, Rees A, Williams S, Dukes S, Goffe A, Dawson L, Mistry R, Chadwick J, Cocks S, Hull R, Loftus A, Baird Y, Moore S, Greenslade S, Margalef J, Chadbourn I, Harris M, Hicks J, Clitheroe P, Connolly S, Hodgkinson S, Haydock H, Sinclair A, Storr E, Cogley L, Natale S, Lovegrove W, Slack K, Nash D, Smith K, Walsh J, Guerdette A, Hill M, Payne D, Taylor B, Sinclair E, Perry M, Debbarma M, Hewitt D, Sriram R, Power A, Cannon J, Devereaux L, Thompson A, Atkinson K, Royle L, Madine J, MacLean K, Sarpong R, Brew‐Graves C, Williams N. Development and validation of a haematuria cancer risk score to identify patients at risk of harbouring cancer. Journal Of Internal Medicine 2019, 285: 436-445. PMID: 30521125, PMCID: PMC6446724, DOI: 10.1111/joim.12868.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsCancer risk scoreNational Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelinesRisk scoreInvestigation of haematuriaPhysician decision-makingAge-specific thresholdsValidation cohortExcellence guidelinesUK hospitalsAmerican Urological Association guidelinesNational guidelinesImprove patientNo significant overfittingImprove patient selectionUpper tract cancerLack of consensusAssociation guidelinesSmoking historySwiss patientsCohortPatient ageDevelopment cohortPatient selectionGuidelinesHaematuria
2018
Who Should Be Investigated for Haematuria? Results of a Contemporary Prospective Observational Study of 3556 Patients
Tan W, Feber A, Sarpong R, Khetrapal P, Rodney S, Jalil R, Mostafid H, Cresswell J, Hicks J, Rane A, Henderson A, Watson D, Cherian J, Williams N, Brew-Graves C, Kelly J, collaborators O. Who Should Be Investigated for Haematuria? Results of a Contemporary Prospective Observational Study of 3556 Patients. European Urology 2018, 74: 10-14. PMID: 29653885, DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.03.008.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsUrinary tract cancerIncidence of urinary tract cancerInvestigation of haematuriaRisk of urinary tract cancerClinically significant cancerDiagnosis of urinary tract cancerHigh-risk cancerProspective observational studyIncidence of cancerSignificant cancerAge thresholdBladder cancerSmoking historyVisible bloodOlder patientsHaematuriaMale genderConsensus recommendationsPatientsObservational studyCancerPatient preferencesCancer diagnosisLack of consensusAge