Imperial College London

Professor Hashim Ahmed

Faculty of MedicineDepartment of Surgery & Cancer

Chair in Urology (Clinical)
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

hashim.ahmed

 
 
//

Location

 

5L28Lab BlockCharing Cross Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Publication Type
Year
to

286 results found

van Luijtelaar A, Greenwood BM, Ahmed HU, Barqawi AB, Barret E, Bomers JGR, Brausi MA, Choyke PL, Cooperberg MR, Eggener S, Feller JF, Frauscher F, George AK, Hindley RG, Jenniskens SFM, Klotz L, Kovacs G, Lindner U, Loeb S, Margolis DJ, Marks LS, May S, Mcclure TD, Montironi R, Nour SG, Oto A, Polascik TJ, Rastinehad AR, De Reyke TM, Reijnen JS, de la Rosette JJMCH, Sedelaar JPM, Sperling DS, Walser EM, Ward JF, Villers A, Ghai S, F├╝tterer JJet al., 2019, Focal laser ablation as clinical treatment of prostate cancer: report from a Delphi consensus project., World J Urol

PURPOSE: To define the role of focal laser ablation (FLA) as clinical treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) using the Delphi consensus method. METHODS: A panel of international experts in the field of focal therapy (FT) in PCa conducted a collaborative consensus project using the Delphi method. Experts were invited to online questionnaires focusing on patient selection and treatment of PCa with FLA during four subsequent rounds. After each round, outcomes were displayed, and questionnaires were modified based on the comments provided by panelists. Results were finalized and discussed during face-to-face meetings. RESULTS: Thirty-seven experts agreed to participate, and consensus was achieved on 39/43 topics. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was defined as any volume Grade Group 2 [Gleason score (GS) 3+4]. Focal therapy was specified as treatment of all csPCa and can be considered primary treatment as an alternative to radical treatment in carefully selected patients. In patients with intermediate-risk PCa (GS 3+4) as well as patients with MRI-visible and biopsy-confirmed local recurrence, FLA is optimal for targeted ablation of a specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible focus. However, FLA should not be applied to candidates for active surveillance and close follow-up is required. Suitability for FLA is based on tumor volume, location to vital structures, GS, MRI-visibility, and biopsy confirmation. CONCLUSION: Focal laser ablation is a promising technique for treatment of clinically localized PCa and should ideally be performed within approved clinical trials. So far, only few studies have reported on FLA and further validation with longer follow-up is mandatory before widespread clinical implementation is justified.

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Shah TT, Peters M, Eldred-Evans D, Miah S, Yap T, Faure-Walker NA, Hosking-Jervis F, Thomas B, Dudderidge T, Hindley RG, McCracken S, Greene D, Nigam R, Valerio M, Minhas S, Winkler M, Arya M, Ahmed HUet al., 2019, Early-Medium-Term Outcomes of Primary Focal Cryotherapy to Treat Nonmetastatic Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer from a Prospective Multicentre Registry., Eur Urol

BACKGROUND: Focal cryotherapy can be used to treat patients with clinically significant nonmetastatic prostate cancer to reduce side effects. OBJECTIVE: Early-medium-term cancer control and functional outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective registry-based case series of 122 consecutive patients undergoing focal cryotherapy between October 1, 2013, and November 30, 2016, in five UK centres. Median follow-up was 27.8mo [interquartile range (IQR) 19.5-36.7]. A total of 35 patients (28.7%) had National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high risk and 87 (71.3%) had intermediate risk disease. Risk and zonal stratification included multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) with targeted and systematic biopsies, or transperineal mapping biopsies. INTERVENTION: Focal cryoablation of MR-visible tumours. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Follow-up involved prostate-specific antigen (PSA) monitoring, mpMRI, and for-cause biopsies. Primary outcome was failure-free survival (FFS), defined as transition to radical, whole-gland, or systemic therapy, or metastases/death. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and functional outcomes. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 80 (65.6%) had anterior ablation, 23 (19.7%) combined posterior and anterior ablation, and two (1.6%) posterior ablation alone (SeedNet or Visual-ICE, BTG plc). Median age was 68.7yr (IQR 64.9-73.8) and preoperative PSA 10.8ng/ml (IQR 7.8-15.6). Overall FFS at 3yr was 90.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 84.2-97.3]. When stratified for the NCCN risk group, 3-yr outcomes were 84.7% (95% CI 71.4-100) in high risk and 93.3% (95% CI 86.8-100) in intermediate risk. At last follow-up, incontinence defined as any pad use was 0/69 (0%) and erectile dysfunction (defined as erections insufficient for penetration) was 5/31 (16.1%). Limitations include lack of long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Focal cryotherapy primarily for anterior intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer results i

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Miah S, Dunford C, Edison M, Eldred-Evans D, Gan C, Shah TT, Lunn P, Winkler M, Ahmed HU, Gibbons N, Hrouda Det al., 2019, A prospective clinical, cost and environmental analysis of a clinician-led virtual urology clinic, ANNALS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND, Vol: 101, Pages: 30-34, ISSN: 0035-8843

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Johnston EW, Latifoltojar A, Sidhu HS, Ramachandran N, Sokolska M, Bainbridge A, Moore C, Ahmed HU, Punwani Set al., 2018, Multiparametric whole-body 3.0-T MRI in newly diagnosed intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement for nodal and metastatic staging., Eur Radiol

OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy and interobserver concordance of whole-body (WB)-MRI, vs. 99mTc bone scintigraphy (BS) and 18fluoro-ethyl-choline (18F-choline) PET/CT for the primary staging of intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: An institutional review board approved prospective cohort study carried out between July 2012 and November 2015, whereby 56 men prospectively underwent 3.0-T multiparametric (mp)-WB-MRI in addition to BS (all patients) ± 18F-choline PET/CT (33 patients). MRI comprised pre- and post-contrast modified Dixon (mDixon), T2-weighted (T2W) imaging, and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Patients underwent follow-up mp-WB-MRI at 1 year to derive the reference standard. WB-MRIs were reviewed by two radiologists applying a 6-point scale and a locked sequential read (LSR) paradigm for the suspicion of nodal (N) and metastatic disease (M1a and M1b). RESULTS: The mean sensitivity/specificity of WB-MRI for N1 disease was 1.00/0.96 respectively, compared with 1.00/0.82 for 18F-choline PET/CT. The mean sensitivity and specificity of WB-MRI, 18F-choline PET/CT, and BS were 0.90/0.88, 0.80/0.92, and 0.60/1.00 for M1b disease. ROC-AUC did not show statistically significant improvement for each component of the LSR; mean ROC-AUC 0.92, 0.94, and 0.93 (p < 0.05) for mDixon + DWI, + T2WI, and + contrast respectively. WB-MRI had an interobserver concordance (κ) of 0.79, 0.68, and 0.58 for N1, M1a, and M1b diseases respectively. CONCLUSIONS: WB-MRI provides high levels of diagnostic accuracy for both nodal and metastatic bone disease, with higher levels of sensitivity than BS for metastatic disease, and similar performance to 18F-choline PET/CT. T2 and post-contrast mDixon had no significant additive value above a protocol comprising mDixon and DWI alone. KEY POINTS: • A whole-body MRI protocol comprising unenhanced mDixon and diffusion-weighted imaging provides high levels of diagnostic accuracy

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Elliott D, Hamdy FC, Leslie TA, Rosario D, Dudderidge T, Hindley R, Emberton M, Brewster S, Sooriakumaran P, Catto JWF, Emara A, Ahmed H, Whybrow P, le Conte S, Donovan JLet al., 2018, Overcoming difficulties with equipoise to enable recruitment to a randomised controlled trial of partial ablation vs radical prostatectomy for unilateral localised prostate cancer, BJU INTERNATIONAL, Vol: 122, Pages: 970-977, ISSN: 1464-4096

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Olivier J, Stavrinides V, Kay J, Freeman A, Pye H, Ahmed Z, Echeverria LC, Heavey S, Simmons LAM, Kanthabalan A, Arya M, Briggs T, Barratt D, Charman SC, Gelister J, Hawkes D, Hu Y, Jameson C, McCartan N, Punwani S, van der Muelen J, Moore C, Emberton M, Ahmed HU, Whitaker HCet al., 2018, Immunohistochemical biomarker validation in highly selective needle biopsy microarrays derived from mpMRI-characterized prostates, PROSTATE, Vol: 78, Pages: 1229-1237, ISSN: 0270-4137

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Miah S, Eldred-Evans D, Simmons LAM, Shah TT, Kanthabalan A, Arya M, Winkler M, McCartan N, Freeman A, Punwani S, Moore CM, Emberton M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Transperineal Template Prostate Mapping Biopsies in the PICTURE Study, JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Vol: 200, Pages: 1235-1240, ISSN: 0022-5347

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Marra G, Ploussard G, Ost P, De Visschere PJL, Briganti A, Gandaglia G, Tilki D, Surcel CI, Tsaur I, Van den Bergh RCN, Kretschmer A, Borgmann H, Gontero P, Ahmed HU, Valerio Met al., 2018, Focal therapy in localised prostate cancer: Real-world urological perspective explored in a cross-sectional European survey, UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, Vol: 36, ISSN: 1078-1439

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Simmons LAM, Kanthabalan A, Arya M, Briggs T, Barratt D, Charman SC, Freeman A, Hawkes D, Hu Y, Jameson C, McCartan N, Moore CM, Punwani S, van der Muelen J, Emberton M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, Accuracy of Transperineal Targeted Prostate Biopsies, Visual Estimation and Image Fusion in Men Needing Repeat Biopsy in the PICTURE Trial, JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Vol: 200, Pages: 1227-1233, ISSN: 0022-5347

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Hamid S, Donaldson IA, Hu Y, Rodell R, Villarini B, Bonmati E, Tranter P, Punwani S, Sidhu HS, Willis S, van der Meulen J, Hawkes D, McCartan N, Potyka I, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Freeman A, Moore CM, Barratt D, Emberton M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, The SmartTarget Biopsy Trial: A Prospective, Within-person Randomised, Blinded Trial Comparing the Accuracy of Visual-registration and Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Image-fusion Targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification., Eur Urol

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted prostate biopsies can improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and decrease the overdetection of insignificant cancers. It is unknown whether visual-registration targeting is sufficient or augmentation with image-fusion software is needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess concordance between the two methods. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a blinded, within-person randomised, paired validating clinical trial. From 2014 to 2016, 141 men who had undergone a prior (positive or negative) transrectal ultrasound biopsy and had a discrete lesion on mpMRI (score 3-5) requiring targeted transperineal biopsy were enrolled at a UK academic hospital; 129 underwent both biopsy strategies and completed the study. INTERVENTION: The order of performing biopsies using visual registration and a computer-assisted MRI/ultrasound image-fusion system (SmartTarget) on each patient was randomised. The equipment was reset between biopsy strategies to mitigate incorporation bias. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The proportion of clinically significant prostate cancer (primary outcome: Gleason pattern ≥3+4=7, maximum cancer core length ≥4mm; secondary outcome: Gleason pattern ≥4+3=7, maximum cancer core length ≥6mm) detected by each method was compared using McNemar's test of paired proportions. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The two strategies combined detected 93 clinically significant prostate cancers (72% of the cohort). Each strategy detected 80/93 (86%) of these cancers; each strategy identified 13 cases missed by the other. Three patients experienced adverse events related to biopsy (urinary retention, urinary tract infection, nausea, and vomiting). No difference in urinary symptoms, erectile function, or quality of life between baseline and follow-up (median 10.5 wk) was observed. The key limitations were lack of parallel-group randomisation and a limit on the number of

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Dikaios N, Giganti F, Sidhu HS, Johnston EW, Appayya MB, Simmons L, Freeman A, Ahmed HU, Atkinson D, Punwani Set al., 2018, Multi-parametric MRI zone-specific diagnostic model performance compared with experienced radiologists for detection of prostate cancer., Eur Radiol

OBJECTIVES: Compare the performance of zone-specific multi-parametric-MRI (mp-MRI) diagnostic models in prostate cancer detection with experienced radiologists. METHODS: A single-centre, IRB approved, prospective STARD compliant 3 T MRI test dataset of 203 patients was generated to test validity and generalisability of previously reported 1.5 T mp-MRI diagnostic models. All patients included within the test dataset underwent 3 T mp-MRI, comprising T2, diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging followed by transperineal template ± targeted index lesion biopsy. Separate diagnostic models (transition zone (TZ) and peripheral zone (PZ)) were applied to respective zones. Sensitivity/specificity and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) were calculated for the two zone-specific models. Two radiologists (A and B) independently Likert scored test 3 T mp-MRI dataset, allowing ROC analysis for each radiologist for each prostate zone. RESULTS: Diagnostic models applied to the test dataset demonstrated a ROC-AUC = 0.74 (95% CI 0.67-0.81) in the PZ and 0.68 (95% CI 0.61-0.75) in the TZ. Radiologist A/B had a ROC-AUC = 0.78/0.74 in the PZ and 0.69/0.69 in the TZ. Radiologists A and B each scored 51 patients in the PZ and 41 and 45 patients respectively in the TZ as Likert 3. The PZ model demonstrated a ROC-AUC = 0.65/0.67 for the patients Likert scored as indeterminate by radiologist A/B respectively, whereas the TZ model demonstrated a ROC-AUC = 0.74/0.69. CONCLUSION: Zone-specific mp-MRI diagnostic models demonstrate generalisability between 1.5 and 3 T mp-MRI protocols and show similar classification performance to experienced radiologists for prostate cancer detection. Results also indicate the ability of diagnostic models to classify cases with an indeterminate radiologist score. KEY POINTS: • MRI diagnostic models had similar performance

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Simmons LAM, Kanthabalan A, Arya M, Briggs T, Charman SC, Freeman A, Gelister J, Jameson C, McCartan N, Moore CM, van der Muelen J, Emberton M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, Prostate Imaging Compared to Transperineal Ultrasound-guided biopsy for significant prostate cancer Risk Evaluation (PICTURE): a prospective cohort validating study assessing Prostate HistoScanning., Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

BACKGROUND: Men with negative prostate biopsies or those diagnosed with low-risk or low-volume intermediate-risk prostate cancers often require a second prostate biopsy prior to a treatment decision. Prostate HistoScanning (PHS) is an ultrasound imaging test that might inform prostate biopsy in such men. METHODS: PICTURE was a prospective, paired-cohort validating trial to assess the diagnostic accuracy of imaging in men requiring a further biopsy (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01492270) (11 January 2012-29 January 2014). We enrolled 330 men who had undergone a prior TRUS biopsy but where diagnostic uncertainty remained. All eligible men underwent PHS and transperineal template prostate mapping (TTPM) biopsy (reference standard). Men were blinded to the imaging results until after undergoing TTPM biopsies. We primarily assessed the ability of PHS to rule out clinically significant prostate (negative predictive value [NPV] and sensitivity) for a target histological condition of Gleason ≥4+3 and/or a cancer core length (MCCL) ≥6 mm. We also assessed the role of visually estimated PHS-targeted biopsies. RESULTS: Of the 330 men enrolled, 249 underwent both PHS and TTPM biopsy. Mean (SD) age was 62 (7) years, median (IQR) PSA 6.8 (4.98-9.50) ng/ml, median (IQR) number of previous biopsies 1 (1-2) and mean (SD) gland size 37 (15.5) ml. One hundred and forty six (59%) had no clinically significant cancer. PHS classified 174 (70%) as suspicious. Sensitivity was 70.3% (95% CI 59.8-79.5) and NPV 41.3% (95% CI 27.0-56.8). Specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were 14.7% (95% CI 9.1-22.0) and 36.8% (95% CI 29.6-44.4), respectively. In all, 213/220 had PHS suspicious areas targeted with targeting sensitivity 13.6% (95% CI 7.3-22.6), specificity 97.6% (95% CI 93.1-99.5), NPV 61.6% (95% CI 54.5-68.4) and PPV 80.0% (95% CI 51.9-95.7). CONCLUSIONS: PHS is not a useful test in men seeking risk stratification following initial prostate biopsy.

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Guillaumier S, Peters M, Arya M, Afzal N, Charman S, Dudderidge T, Hosking-Jervis F, Hindley RG, Lewi H, McCartan N, Moore CM, Nigam R, Ogden C, Persad R, Shah K, van der Meulen J, Virdi J, Winkler M, Emberton M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, A Multicentre Study of 5-year Outcomes Following Focal Therapy in Treating Clinically Significant Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, Vol: 74, Pages: 422-429, ISSN: 0302-2838

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Bass EJ, Freeman A, Jameson C, Punwani S, Moore CM, Arya M, Emberton M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, Prostate cancer diagnostic pathway: Is a one-stop cognitive MRI targeted biopsy service a realistic goal in everyday practice? A pilot cohort in a tertiary referral centre in the UK, BMJ OPEN, Vol: 8, ISSN: 2044-6055

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Miah S, Winkler M, Ahmed HU, 2018, Re: Predictors of Infectious Complications After Targeted Prophylaxis for Prostate Needle Biopsy, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, Vol: 74, Pages: 523-524, ISSN: 0302-2838

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Lovegrove CE, Matanhelia M, Randeva J, Eldred-Evans D, Tam H, Miah S, Winkler M, Ahmed HU, Shah TTet al., 2018, Prostate imaging features that indicate benign or malignant pathology on biopsy, TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, Vol: 7, Pages: S420-S435, ISSN: 2223-4683

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Hamdy FC, Elliott D, le Conte S, Davies LC, Burns RM, Thomson C, Gray R, Wolstenholme J, Donovan JL, Fitzpatrick R, Verrill C, Gleeson F, Singh S, Rosario D, Catto JWF, Brewster S, Dudderidge T, Hindley R, Emara A, Sooriakumaran P, Ahmed HU, Leslie TAet al., 2018, Partial ablation versus radical prostatectomy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer: the PART feasibility RCT, HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, Vol: 22, Pages: 1-+, ISSN: 1366-5278

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Chandak P, Byrne N, Lynch H, Allen C, Rottenberg G, Chandra A, Raison N, Ahmed H, Kasivisvanathan V, Elhage O, Dasgupta Pet al., 2018, Three-dimensional printing in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy - an Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) Phase 2a study, BJU INTERNATIONAL, Vol: 122, Pages: 360-361, ISSN: 1464-4096

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Appayya MB, Adshead J, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Bainbridge A, Barrett T, Giganti F, Graham J, Haslam P, Johnston EW, Kastner C, Kirkham APS, Lipton A, McNeill A, Moniz L, Moore CM, Nabi G, Padhani AR, Parker C, Patel A, Pursey J, Richenberg J, Staffurth J, van der Meulen J, Walls D, Punwani Set al., 2018, National implementation of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection - recommendations from a UK consensus meeting, BJU INTERNATIONAL, Vol: 122, Pages: 13-25, ISSN: 1464-4096

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Brown LC, Ahmed HU, Faria R, Bosaily AE-S, Gabe R, Kaplan RS, Parmar M, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham A, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Bott S, Burns-Cox N, Dudderidge T, Ghei M, Henderson A, Persad R, Rosario DJ, Shergill I, Winkler M, Soares M, Spackman E, Sculpher M, Emberton Met al., 2018, Multiparametric MRI to improve detection of prostate cancer compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy alone: the PROMIS study, HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, Vol: 22, Pages: 1-+, ISSN: 1366-5278

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Faria R, Soares MO, Spackman E, Ahmed HU, Brown LC, Kaplan R, Emberton M, Sculpher MJet al., 2018, Re: Jochen Walz. The "PROMIS" of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cost Effectiveness in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis? Eur Urol 2018;73:31-2, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, Vol: 73, Pages: E151-E152, ISSN: 0302-2838

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Ganzer R, Arthanareeswaran VKA, Ahmed HU, Cestari A, Rischmann P, Salomon G, Teber D, Liatsikos E, Stolzenburg J-U, Barret Eet al., 2018, Which technology to select for primary focal treatment of prostate cancer?-European Section of Urotechnology (ESUT) position statement, PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES, Vol: 21, Pages: 175-186, ISSN: 1365-7852

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Shah TT, Valerio M, Ahmed HU, 2018, Re: Effect of Prior Focal Therapy on Perioperative, Oncologic and Functional Outcomes of Salvage Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy, JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Vol: 199, Pages: 1634-1635, ISSN: 0022-5347

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Bonmati E, Hu Y, Villarini B, Rodell R, Martin P, Han L, Donaldson I, Ahmed HU, Moore CM, Emberton M, Barratt DCet al., 2018, Technical Note: Error metrics for estimating the accuracy of needle/instrument placement during transperineal magnetic resonance/ultrasound-guided prostate interventions, MEDICAL PHYSICS, Vol: 45, Pages: 1408-1414, ISSN: 0094-2405

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Giancarlo M, Ploussard G, Ost P, De Visschere PJL, Sooriakumaran P, Briganti A, Gandaglia G, Tilki D, Surcel CI, Tsaur I, Van den Bergh R, Kretschmer A, Borgmann H, Gontero P, Ahmed H, Valerio Met al., 2018, AN INTERNATIONAL SURVEY ABOUT FOCAL THERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER FROM THE YOUNG ACADEMIC UROLOGISTS (YAU): THE OPINION OF 484 PHYSICIANS, Publisher: INT INST ANTICANCER RESEARCH, Pages: 2567-2568, ISSN: 0250-7005

CONFERENCE PAPER

Shah TT, Peters M, Guillaumier S, Arya M, Afzal N, Hosking-Jervis F, Dudderidge T, Hindley R, Lewi H, McCartan N, Moore CM, Nigam R, Ogden C, Persad R, Shah K, Virdi J, Winkler M, Emberton M, Ahmed HU, Minhas Set al., 2018, PREDICTORS OF POOR FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES AFTER FOCAL HIGH INTENSITY FOCUSSED ULTRASOUND (HIFU), American-Urological-Association(AUA) Annual Meeting, Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, Pages: E378-E379, ISSN: 0022-5347

CONFERENCE PAPER

Ahmed HU, 2018, Opening Our Eyes to Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Before Prostate Biopsy, EUROPEAN UROLOGY, Vol: 73, Pages: 361-362, ISSN: 0302-2838

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Grey A, Scott R, Charman S, van der Meulen J, Frinking P, Acher P, Liyanage S, Madaan S, Constantinescu G, Shah B, Graves CB, Freeman A, Jameson C, Ramachandran N, Emberton M, Arya M, Ahmed HUet al., 2018, The CADMUS trial - Multi-parametric ultrasound targeted biopsies compared to multi-parametric MRI targeted biopsies in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer, CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, Vol: 66, Pages: 86-92, ISSN: 1551-7144

JOURNAL ARTICLE

This data is extracted from the Web of Science and reproduced under a licence from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of the Science business of Thomson Reuters.

Request URL: http://wlsprd.imperial.ac.uk:80/respub/WEB-INF/jsp/search-html.jsp Request URI: /respub/WEB-INF/jsp/search-html.jsp Query String: respub-action=search.html&id=00936994&limit=30&person=true