EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010)
|
|
- Jocelyn Goodman
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) available at journal homepage: Prostate Cancer Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators: A Performance Comparison in a Contemporary Screened Cohort Vítor Cavadas *, Luís Osório, Francisco Sabell, Frederico Teves, Frederico Branco, Miguel Silva-Ramos Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar do Porto, Oporto, Portugal Article info Article history: Accepted June 14, 2010 Published online ahead of print on June 22, 2010 Keywords: Diagnosis Prostate biopsy Prostate cancer Risk calculators Abstract Background: Several models can predict the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) on biopsy. Objective: To evaluate the performance of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculators in detecting PCa in a contemporary screened cohort. Design, setting, and participants: We analyzed prebiopsy characteristics of 525 consecutive screened patients submitted to biopsy, as required by the risk calculators, in one European center between 2006 and Measurements: Comparisons were done using tests of accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC-ROC]), calibration plots, and decision curve analysis. Biopsy predictors were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results and limitations: PCa was detected in 35.2% of the subjects. Among predictors included in the calculators, the logarithmic transformations of prostate volume and prostate-specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination, previous biopsy status, and age were significantly associated with PCa; transrectal ultrasound abnormalities and family history were not. AUC-ROC for the ERSPC calculator was significantly higher than the PCPT calculator and PSA alone (80.1%, 74.4%, and 64.3%, respectively). Calibration plots showed better performance for the ERSPC calculator; nevertheless, ERSPC may underestimate risk, while PCPT tends to overestimate predictions. Decision curve analysis displayed higher net benefit for the ERSPC calculator; 9% and 23% unnecessary biopsies can be avoided if a threshold probability of 20% and 30%, respectively, is adopted. In contrast, the PCPT model displayed very limited benefit. Our findings apply to a screened European cohort submitted to extended biopsy schemes; consequently, caution should be exerted when considering different populations. Conclusions: The ERSPC risk calculator, by incorporating several risks factors, can aid in the estimation of individual PCa risk and in the decision to perform biopsy. The ERSPC calculator outperformed the PCPT model, which is of very limited value, in a contemporary cohort of screened patients. # 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. Serviço de Urologia, Hospital Geral de Santo António Centro Hospitalar do Porto, Largo Prof. Abel Salazar, Porto, Portugal. Tel ; Fax: address: vcavadas@gmail.com (V. Cavadas) /$ see back matter # 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi: /j.eururo
2 552 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) Introduction Nomograms and risk calculators have shown better accuracy than prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in predicting prostate cancer (PCa) on biopsy. Nevertheless, constructed models may not apply well externally since widely varying risk levels are generated for similar patients by different models [1]. Two online risk calculators to predict individual risk of a positive biopsy have recently become available [2,3]. The risk of positive biopsy for the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) calculator depends on PSA, family history, outcome of digital rectal examination (DRE), and prior biopsy [4]. The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator estimates the chance of positive biopsy in previously unscreened (risk indicator 3), previously screened but not biopsied (risk indicator 4), and previously screened and biopsied (risk indicator 5) men, according to PSA, ultrasound-assessed prostate volume (PV), outcome of DRE, outcome of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), and prior biopsy status [5]. Currently, four studies have externally validated the PCPT risk calculator [6 9] and only one study has externally validated the risk indicator 3 (previously unscreened) of the ERSPC calculator [10]. Risk indicators 4 and 5 have not been validated. A comparison of the PCPT and ERSPC risk calculators using virtual standard index cases pointed out differences in risk estimates between them [11], but no studies have compared their performance in a clinical setting. In this study we analyze and compare their performance in a contemporary cohort of screened patients. 2. Materials and methods We reviewed the records of 593 consecutive patients who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy between January 2006 and December 2007 at our institution. Men with previous diagnosis of PCa or atypical small acinar proliferation of the prostate, PSA <0.5 ng/ml or >50 ng/ml, or PV <10 ml or >150 ml, were excluded (PSA and PV boundaries defined by the admitted input). Previously screened patients (PSA judged as normal in the previous 2 yr, with or without DRE) were referred for prostate biopsy by our department urologists based on new clinical findings (abnormal PSA or DRE); no specific cut-off for PSA was used at that time for biopsy referral. Systematic 10-core and 12-core TRUS-guided prostate biopsies were performed on initial biopsy (I-biopsy) and repeat biopsy (R-biopsy), respectively Statistical analysis PCPT risk calculation was performed using the available formula [4]; for the ERSPC, since no formula is available, risk estimation was obtained by individual data input to the online calculators 4 ( no prior biopsy ) and 5 ( prior negative biopsy ). Continuous variables are reported as the median and range; categorical variables are reported as the number of occurrences and frequency. Mann-Whitney or the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Pearson x 2 test were used for statistical comparisons of continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to identify independent predictors of PCa on biopsy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC- ROC) was calculated for both risk calculators and PSA for the entire cohort as well as for the subsets of I-biopsy and R-biopsy. Differences in predictive accuracy estimates were tested for statistical significance with the Mantel-Haenszel test. Performance characteristics of the risk calculators were examined by calibration plots, where the x-axis represents the predicted probability and the y-axis represents the actual observed proportion of positive biopsy. Calibration was assessed by grouping patients into 12 groups (each comprising 43 or 44 patients) with respect to their predicted probabilities and then comparing the mean of each group with the observed proportion of men with cancer. The sum of squares of the residuals (SSR) was used to assess the deviation from perfect prediction (the 458 line). For the subsets of I-biopsy and R-biopsy, respectively eight and four groups were used (to also incorporate 43 or 44 patients). Finally, decision curve analysis [12] was used to explore the clinical effects of the calculators. This method estimates a net benefit for prediction models by summing the benefits (true positives) and subtracting the harms (false positives). As the value of a true positive (early detection of cancer) may be different from the disadvantages resulting from a false positive (avoidable biopsy), the net benefit weighs true and false positives differently by using the threshold probability at which a patient would opt for biopsy. The best model displays the higher net benefits throughout a range of threshold probabilities. As suggested by Steyerberg and Vickers [13], the large majority of patients (and we suspect referring doctors likewise) would have a threshold probability to undergo prostate biopsy between 10% and 40%, so this range was chosen for analysis. All tests were two-sided with a significance level set at Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v.16.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA), and MedCalc v (MedCalc Software bvba, Mariakerke, Belgium). 3. Results Among the 593 records surveyed, we identified 545 patients who met our criteria for analysis; 20 patients were excluded for missing information about family history (n = 17), and/ or DRE results (n = 5). Therefore, 525 different patients were included in this analysis; their characteristics are shown in Table 1. PCa was diagnosed in 185 patients (35.2%), 94 being high grade (Gleason 7). The detection rate was significantly lower on R-biopsy compared to I-biopsy (21.6% and 42.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). Age and PSA were significantly higher for positive-biopsy patients ( p < 0.001, for both). In contrast, PV was significantly lower in PCa-diagnosed patients ( p < 0.001). On univariate logistic regression, neither TRUS findings nor family history were significant predictors of a positive biopsy. On univariate and multivariate logistic regression, the logarithmic transformations of PV and PSA, DRE results, previous biopsy status, and age were significant predictors of PCa (Table 2). Overall, PCPT- and ERSPC-calculated prebiopsy risks of harboring cancer were significantly different: median risk 51% (first quartile [Q1]: 41%, third quartile [Q3]: 65%, range: 18 92%) for the PCPT risk calculator, compared with median risk 22% (Q1: 13%, Q3: 35%, range: 3 97%) for the ERSPC risk calculator ( p < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). PCPTcalculated risk was significantly higher in the positive-biopsy
3 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) Table 1 Clinical characteristics of the study cohort Cohort Negative biopsy Positive biopsy p value Race Caucasian, No. (%) 525 (100) 340 (64.8) 185 (35.2) N/A Age, median (range), yr 67 (42 89) 65 (42 89) 69 (42 88) <0.001 * Age, No. (%) <55 yr 35 (6.7) 27 (7.9) 8 (4.3) <0.001 ** yr 80 (15.2) 62 (18.2) 18 (9.7) yr 96 (18.3) 75 (22.1) 21 (11.4) yr 124 (23.6) 75 (22.1) 49 (26.5) yr 103 (19.6) 59 (17.4) 44 (23.8) 75 yr 87 (16.6) 42 (12.4) 45 (24.3) PSA level, median (range), ng/ml 8.14 ( ) 7.50 ( ) 9.60 ( ) <0.001 * PSA level, No. (%) <2.5 ng/ml 15 (2.9) 13 (3.8) 2 (1.1) <0.001 ** ng/ml 20 (3.8) 16 (4.7) 4 (2.2) ng/ml 297 (56.6) 208 (61.2) 89 (48.1) ng/ml 127 (24.2) 87 (25.6) 40 (21.6) 20 ng/ml 66 (12.6) 16 (4.7) 50 (27.0) DRE, No. (%) Normal 350 (66.7) 266 (78.2) 84 (45.4) <0.001 ** Abnormal 175 (33.3) 74 (21.8) 101 (54.6) TRUS, No. (%) Normal 413 (78.7) 272 (80.0) 141 (76.2) ** Abnormal 112 (21.3) 68 (20.0) 44 (23.8) Prostate volume, median (range), ml 55 (10 150) 61 (22 150) 40 (10 150) <0.001 * Prostate volume, No. (%) <30 ml 66 (12.6) 20 (5.9) 46 (24.9) <0.001 ** ml 217 (41.3) 127 (37.4) 90 (48.6) ml 164 (31.2) 129 (37.9) 35 (18.9) ml 48 (9.1) 40 (11.8) 8 (4.3) 120 ml 30 (5.7) 24 (7.1) 6 (3.2) Family history, No. (%) Negative 504 (96) 326 (95.9) 178 (96.0) ** Positive 21 (4) 14 (4.1) 7 (4.0) Previous biopsy, No. (%) No 349 (66.5) 202 (59.4) 147 (79.5) <0.001 ** Yes 176 (33.5) 138 (40.6) 38 (20.5) PSA = prostate-specific antigen; DRE = digital rectal examination; TRUS = transrectal ultrasound; N/A = not applicable. * Mann-Whitney test. ** x 2 test. group of patients (median 65%, Q1: 48%, Q3: 81%, range: 26 92%;) compared with those with no cancer (median 47%, Q1: 39%, Q3: 59%, range: 18 90% ( p < 0.001, Mann-Whitney test)). Likewise, ERSPC-calculated risk was higher for those with a positive biopsy (median 39%, Q1: 22.5%, Q3: 62.5%, range: 6 97%) compared with those with no cancer (median 17%, Q1: 11%, Q3: 25%, range: 3 72% ( p < 0.001, Mann- Whitney test)). Table 2 Univariate and multivariate logistic regression for biopsy outcome predictors Variable Univariate logistic regression Multivariate logistic regression OR 95% CI p value Predictive accuracy, % OR 95% CI p value Predictive accuracy, % Ln, volume < < Ln, PSA < <0.001 DRE < <0.001 Prior biopsy < <0.001 Age, yr < TRUS N/A Family history CI = confidence interval; DRE = digital rectal examination; PSA = prostate-specific antigen; Ln = natural logarithm; N/A = not applicable; OR = odds ratio; TRUS = transrectal ultrasound.
4 554 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) Fig. 1 Receiver operating characteristic curves for the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone for (A) the entire cohort, (B) initial biopsy, and (C) repeat biopsy. Table 3 Comparison of areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone AUC 95% CI p value ERSPC PCPT PSA Cohort ERSPC <0.001 PCPT <0.001 PSA <0.001 <0.001 Initial biopsy ERSPC <0.001 PCPT PSA < Repeat biopsy ERSPC PCPT PSA AUC = area under the curve; CI = confidence interval. A significantly higher AUC was observed for the PCPT and ERSPC risk calculators compared with PSA alone, with the ERSPC achieving the highest predictive accuracy (Fig. 1 and Table 3). Analyzing the calibration plots for the entire cohort, ERSPC tends to underestimate risk while PCPT overestimates risk of positive biopsy, with ERSPC showing overall better calibration (SSR of 0.14 for the ERSPC vs 0.56 for PCPT calculator). The ERSPC risk calculator shows very good calibration for predicted risks <35%; similar results are seen for the subcohort of I-biopsy. For the R-biopsy subset of patients, only the ERSPC model retains good calibration and only for predicted risks <19% (Fig. 2). The ERSPC calculator has the highest net benefit in the defined range of interest (10 40% probability), consistently outperforming the PCPT model and the Treat all strategy for probabilities above 14% (Fig. 3). Table 4 shows the number of cancers missed and the reduction in biopsies according to threshold probability for both calculators, along with the missed cancers if a PSAbased decision was undertaken for the same amount of reduction in biopsies. Fig. 2 Calibration plots depicting the agreement between predicted and observed probabilities of positive biopsy for the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators for (A) the entire cohort, (B) initial biopsy, and (C) repeat biopsy.
5 Fig. 3 Decision curve analysis for positive biopsy prediction by European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculators for (A) the entire cohort, (B) initial biopsy, and (C) repeat biopsy, in the range of 10 40% threshold probability. The bottom table displays net benefit and reduction in avoidable biopsies for each of the two risk calculators compared with the Treat all strategy of performing biopsy on every patient in the cohort for different threshold probabilities in the same range. EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010)
6 556 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) Table 4 Number of total and high-grade (defined as Gleason I7) cancers missed and reduction in biopsies, according to threshold probability in the range of 10 40% for the risk calculators, and the missed cancers if a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) based decision was made for the same proportion of reduction in biopsies Calculator-based decision Biopsies spared, No. (%) PSA-based decision Threshold probability, % Cancers missed, No. (%) High grade missed, No. (%) Cancers missed, No. (%) High grade missed, No. (%) 10 ERSPC 7 (3.8) 3 (3.2) 81 (15.4) 17 (9.2) 5 (5.3) PCPT 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) N/A N/A 15 ERSPC 21 (11.4) 7 (7.4) 160 (30.5) 43 (23.2) 14 (14.9) PCPT 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) N/A N/A 20 ERSPC 36 (19.5) 11 (11.7) 229 (43.6) 63 (34.1) 21 (22.3) PCPT 0 (0) 0 (0) 4 (0.8) 0 (0) 0 (0) 25 ERSPC 52 (28.1) 17 (18.1) 303 (57.7) 85 (45.9) 33 (35.1) PCPT 0 (0) 0 (0) 4 (0.8) 0 (0) 0 (0) 30 ERSPC 66 (35.7) 23 (24.5) 343 (65.3) 96 (51.9) 39 (41.5) PCPT 1 (0.5) 0 (0) 14 (2.7) 2 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 35 ERSPC 84 (45.4) 29 (30.9) 390 (74.3) 110 (59.5) 46 (48.9) PCPT 5 (2.7) 2 (2.1) 50 (9.5) 7 (3.8) 2 (2.1) 40 ERSPC 93 (50.2) 35 (37.2) 411 (78.3) 117 (63.2) 48 (51.1) PCPT 19 (10.3) 6 (6.4) 112 (21.3) 26 (14.1) 10 (10.6) ERSPC = European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer; PCPT = Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial; N/A = not applicable. 4. Discussion Statistical and computational models have been developed to predict more accurately an individual s risk of harboring PCa at biopsy, mostly because PSA and PSA-related measurements have proved to be limited in this task. In a recent review including 23 studies examining 36 predictive models, 14 direct comparisons between model and PSA accuracies (AUC-ROC) showed a benefit from nomograms or artificial neural networks over PSA alone varying between 2% and 26% [1]. The original study from which the PCPT calculator was derived reported an AUC-ROC of 70.2% for the calculator, slightly higher than the 67.8% reported for PSA alone [4]. Four studies externally validating this calculator have been published since [6 9], reporting AUCs between 56.9% and 69.1% for the PCPT model, increasing predictive accuracy between 1.5% and 4.8% compared with PSA alone (Table 5). No external validations have been published for the ERSPC model predicting risk in screened patients (our cohort being studied); results of an external validation of the ERSPC risk calculator for previously unscreened men showed good discrimination with an AUC of 77% (comparable to the 79% for the original cohort) [10]. Our study shows that, in a screened population, both ERSPC and PCPT risk calculators outperform PSA alone in predicting PCa on biopsy. The AUC-ROC of 64.3% for PSA alone is significantly increased to 74.4% using the PCPT model and 80.1% by the ERSPC calculator. Furthermore, the ERSPC risk calculator was found to have significantly higher predictive accuracy than the PCPT model, except for the R-biopsy subcohort where differences failed to achieve statistical significance. Another important issue when evaluating prediction tools concerns calibration. Risk underestimation would be expected from both calculators since a significantly higher number of cores was taken in our study (10 of 12 cores vs 6 in ERSPC and >80% of PCPT biopsies) [11]. Nevertheless, we have shown good calibration for the ERSPC calculator, especially for predicted risks <35%; above this threshold there is, indeed, a tendency to underestimate risk. Calibration is worse for the PCPT calculator, which surprisingly overestimates risk. Neither of these calculators displays good calibration for the subcohort of R-biopsy patients. Decision curve analysis has shown the superiority of the ERSPC model in the range of interest (10 40% threshold probability, as suggested by Steyerberg and Vickers [13]) and a very limited value for the use of the PCPT calculator. Table 5 Studies evaluating Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculator performance versus prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone Cohort, No. Cancer incidence, % AUC for PCPT, % AUC for PSA, % PCPT vs PSA Increase in AUC, % p value Thompson et al. [4] N/A Parekh et al. [6] >0.05 Hernandez et al. [7] <0.001 Eyre et al. [8] Nguyen et al. [9] N/A Current study <0.001 AUC = area under the curve.
7 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) For example, at a threshold probability of 20%, basing biopsy decision on the ERSPC calculator is equivalent to a strategy that reduced the number of biopsies by 9% but which missed no cancers; increasing the threshold to 30%, then, the reduction in avoidable biopsies would be 23%. Of course, when a threshold of 20% or 30% is set, we are assuming by definition that we could miss as much as 20% or 30% of cancers, respectively. But Table 4 shows that basing decisions on PSA alone to spare the same number of biopsies of a specific threshold probability for the ERSPC model would roughly double the total number of missed tumors, as well of missed high-grade cancers. Taking all of the above into consideration, the ERSPC emerges as the best predictive model. Many reasons could account for its superiority in our study cohort. First, our study population being European in origin may resemble better the one used to develop the ERSPC calculator. Second, only the ERSPC model takes into account PV, which was found to be highly predictive of PCa in our cohort. Third, family history did not reach predictive value in our cohort and was also discharged in the ERSPC but considered for the PCPT calculator. Fourth, cancer detection rates according to PSA level in our study cohort were more similar to the ones reported by the ERSPC: 96.7%, 74.8%, and 24.7% of the total number of cancers were detected in the PSA range >4 ng/ml in our study, ERSPC, and PCPT, respectively [11]. Level of complexity is also a parameter analyzed in predictive tools. Both online risk calculators are user friendly and require few input variables. Nevertheless, some might point out as a major drawback the need for prebiopsy TRUS (to evaluate PV and the existence of visible lesions) in order to estimate risk and aid decision when using the ERSPC model. This could be overcome by estimating PV when performing DRE; then discuss the possible risks and agree on a threshold to biopsy; and finally, decide, when performing TRUS, whether or not to biopsy immediately. Some limitations are acknowledged in our study. First, this is a retrospective study. Second, our cohort comprised only Caucasian patients; nevertheless, race is not a predictive variable in both calculators. Third, family history of PCa was reported in only 4% of our patients, which could account for its lack of predictive value. Fourth, the risk calculators are mainly based on the results of sextant biopsies, while we adopted 10- and 12-core schemes for I-biopsy and R-biopsy, respectively. From another standpoint, our study provides new and invaluable information on the clinical applicability of these online risk calculators. It constitutes the first study comparing their performance outside a clinical trial setting and provides data on discrimination, calibration, and decision analysis to support their external validity. Predictive models do not replace clinical judgment or patient preference, but may be useful in providing a starting point when deciding to perform a prostate biopsy. As a consequence of the improved predictive accuracy, unnecessary biopsies can be effectively avoided without compromising early detection of PCa. 5. Conclusions The ERSPC risk calculator, by incorporating several risks factors, can aid in estimating individual risk of PCa and deciding the need for prostate biopsy in our daily practice, especially on initial biopsy, although risk could be underestimated mainly due to higher sampling schemes in current practice. In contrast, the PCPT calculator has very limited value when applied to biopsy decision-making in a screened population. Author contributions: Vítor Cavadas had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Cavadas, Silva-Ramos. Acquisition of data: Cavadas, Sabell, Teves. Analysis and interpretation of data: Cavadas, Osório, Silva-Ramos. Drafting of the manuscript: Cavadas, Teves, Branco. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Osório, Silva-Ramos. Statistical analysis: Cavadas, Sabell, Branco. Obtaining funding: None. Administrative, technical, or material support: None. Supervision: Silva-Ramos. Other (specify): None. Financial disclosures: I certify that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: None. Funding/Support and role of the sponsor: None. References [1] Schröder F, Kattan MW. The comparability of models for predicting the risk of a positive prostate biopsy with prostatespecific antigen alone: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2008;54: [2] Risk of biopsy-detectable prostate cancer. University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio Web site. Calc/Pages/uroriskcalc.jsp. Accessed November [3] Background information. SWOP Prostate Cancer Research Foundation Web site. Accessed November [4] Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al. Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98: [5] Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, Kranse R, et al. A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010;57: [6] Parekh DJ, Ankerst DP, Higgins BA, et al. External validation of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in a screened population. Urology 2006;68: [7] Hernandez DJ, Han M, Humphreys EB, et al. Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy: comparison of a novel regression-based model, the prostate cancer risk calculator, and prostate-specific antigen level alone. BJU Int 2009;103: [8] Eyre SJ, Ankerst DP, Wei JT, et al. Validation in a multiple urology practice cohort of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial
8 558 EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) calculator for predicting prostate cancer detection. J Urol 2009; 182: [9] Nguyen CT, Yu C, Moussa A, Kattan MW, Jones JS. Performance of Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in a contemporary cohort screened for prostate cancer and diagnosed by extended prostate biopsy. J Urol 2010;183: [10] Roobol MJ, Kranse R, Maattanen L, Schröder FH. External validation of the Riskindicator 1. ERSPC Rotterdam, Helsinki and Tampere. Eur Urol Suppl 2009;8:192. [11] Van den Bergh RCN, Roobol MJ, Wolters T, van Leeuwen PJ, Schröder FH. The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators indicating a positive prostate biopsy: a comparison. BJU Int 2008;102: [12] Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006;26: [13] Steyerberg EW, Vickers EJ. Decision curve analysis: a discussion. Med Decis Making 2008;28:146 9.
Prospective validation of a risk calculator which calculates the probability of a positive prostate biopsy in a contemporary clinical cohort
European Journal of Cancer (2012) 48, 1809 1815 Available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.ejconline.com Prospective validation of a risk calculator which calculates the probability of a
More informationA nomogram based on age, prostate-specific antigen level, prostate volume and digital rectal examination for predicting risk of prostate cancer
(2013) 15, 129 133 ß 2013 AJA, SIMM & SJTU. All rights reserved 1008-682X/13 $32.00 www.nature.com/aja ORIGINAL ARTICLE A nomogram based on age, prostate-specific antigen level, prostate volume and digital
More informationeuropean urology 55 (2009)
european urology 55 (2009) 385 393 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Is Prostate-Specific Antigen Velocity Selective for Clinically Significant
More informationBJUI. Study Type Prognosis (individual cohort study) Level of Evidence 2b OBJECTIVES CONCLUSIONS
. JOURNAL COMPILATION 2008 BJU INTERNATIONAL Urological Oncology PREDICTING THE OUTCOME OF PROSTATE BIOPSY HERNANDEZ et al. BJUI BJU INTERNATIONAL Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy: comparison
More informationThe Huashan risk calculators performed better in prediction of prostate cancer in Chinese population: a training study followed by a validation study
Asian Journal of Andrology (2016) 18, 925 929 2016 AJA, SIMM & SJTU. All rights reserved 1008-682X www.asiaandro.com; www.ajandrology.com Prostate Cancer Open Access ORIGINAL ARTICLE The Huashan risk calculators
More informationPredicting Prostate Biopsy Outcome Using a PCA3-based Nomogram in a Polish Cohort
Predicting Prostate Biopsy Outcome Using a PCA3-based Nomogram in a Polish Cohort MACIEJ SALAGIERSKI 1, PETER MULDERS 2 and JACK A. SCHALKEN 2 1 Urology Department, Medical University of Łódź, Poland;
More informationExternal Validation of Urinary PCA3-Based Nomograms to Individually Predict Prostate Biopsy Outcome
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 58 (2010) 727 732 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer External Validation of Urinary PCA3-Based Nomograms to Individually Predict
More informationDevelopment and Internal Validation of a Prostate Health Index Based Nomogram for Predicting Prostate Cancer at Extended Biopsy
Development and Internal Validation of a Prostate Health Index Based Nomogram for Predicting Prostate Cancer at Extended Biopsy Giovanni Lughezzani,*, Massimo Lazzeri, Alessandro Larcher, Giuliana Lista,
More informationEUROPEAN UROLOGY 62 (2012)
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 62 (2012) 745 752 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by Allison S. Glass, Matthew R. Cooperberg and
More informationDeveloping a new score system for patients with PSA ranging from 4 to 20 ng/ ml to improve the accuracy of PCa detection
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-3176-3 RESEARCH Open Access Developing a new score system for patients with PSA ranging from 4 to 20 ng/ ml to improve the accuracy of PCa detection Yuxiao Zheng, Yuan Huang, Gong
More informationNIH Public Access Author Manuscript World J Urol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 February 1.
NIH Public Access Author Manuscript Published in final edited form as: World J Urol. 2011 February ; 29(1): 11 14. doi:10.1007/s00345-010-0625-4. Significance of preoperative PSA velocity in men with low
More informationProstate Cancer Gene 3 (PCA3): Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Biopsy Nomogram
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 56 (2009) 659 668 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Prostate Cancer Gene 3 (PCA3): Development and Internal Validation of a Novel
More informationNIH Public Access Author Manuscript World J Urol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 April 04.
NIH Public Access Author Manuscript Published in final edited form as: World J Urol. 2012 April ; 30(2): 181 187. doi:10.1007/s00345-011-0818-5. Evaluating The PCPT Risk Calculator in Ten International
More informationCancer. Description. Section: Surgery Effective Date: October 15, 2016 Subsection: Original Policy Date: September 9, 2011 Subject:
Subject: Saturation Biopsy for Diagnosis, Last Review Status/Date: September 2016 Page: 1 of 9 Saturation Biopsy for Diagnosis, Description Saturation biopsy of the prostate, in which more cores are obtained
More informationSerum Prostate-Specific Antigen as a Predictor of Prostate Volume in the Community: The Krimpen Study
european urology 51 (2007) 1645 1653 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen as a Predictor of Prostate
More informationJ Clin Oncol 25: by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION
VOLUME 25 NUMBER 21 JULY 20 2007 JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T Prediction of Prostate Cancer for Patients Receiving Finasteride: Results From the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial
More informationTOPIC PAPER. World J Urol (2012) 30: DOI /s y
World J Urol (2012) 30:149 155 DOI 1007/s00345-011-0804-y TOPIC PAPER Importance of prostate volume in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate (ERSPC) risk calculators: results from the
More informationProstate volume predicts high grade prostate cancer both in digital rectal examination negative (ct1c) and positive ( ct2) patients
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Vol. 40 (5): 613-619, September - October, 2014 doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.05.05 Prostate volume predicts high grade prostate cancer both in digital rectal examination negative
More informationPSA Doubling Time Versus PSA Velocity to Predict High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
european urology 54 (2008) 1073 1080 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer PSA Doubling Time Versus PSA Velocity to Predict High-Risk Prostate Cancer:
More informationResearch Article External Validation of an Artificial Neural Network and Two Nomograms for Prostate Cancer Detection
International Scholarly Research Network ISRN Urology Volume 2012, Article ID 643181, 6 pages doi:10.5402/2012/643181 Research Article External Validation of an Artificial Neural Network and Two Nomograms
More informationDetection & Risk Stratification for Early Stage Prostate Cancer
Detection & Risk Stratification for Early Stage Prostate Cancer Andrew J. Stephenson, MD, FRCSC, FACS Chief, Urologic Oncology Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute Cleveland Clinic Risk Stratification:
More informationPREVALENCE OF PROSTATE CANCER AMONG HYPOGONADAL MEN WITH PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN LEVELS OF 4.0 ng/ml OR LESS
ADULT UROLOGY PREVALENCE OF PROSTATE CANCER AMONG HYPOGONADAL MEN WITH PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN LEVELS OF 4.0 ng/ml OR LESS ABRAHAM MORGENTALER AND ERNANI LUIS RHODEN ABSTRACT Objectives. To determine
More informationAmbulatory and Office Urology Optimal Measure of PSA Kinetics to Identify Prostate Cancer
Ambulatory and Office Urology Optimal Measure of PSA Kinetics to Identify Prostate Cancer Luigi Benecchi, Anna Maria Pieri, Carmelo Destro Pastizzaro, and Michele Potenzoni OBJECTIVES METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS
More informationClinical Utility of the PCA3 Urine Assay in European Men Scheduled for Repeat Biopsy
european urology 54 (2008) 1081 1088 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Clinical Utility of the PCA3 Urine Assay in European Men Scheduled for
More informationPreoperative Gleason score, percent of positive prostate biopsies and PSA in predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy
JBUON 2013; 18(4): 954-960 ISSN: 1107-0625, online ISSN: 2241-6293 www.jbuon.com E-mail: editorial_office@jbuon.com ORIGINAL ARTICLE Gleason score, percent of positive prostate and PSA in predicting biochemical
More informationAssessment of performance and decision curve analysis
Assessment of performance and decision curve analysis Ewout Steyerberg, Andrew Vickers Dept of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands Dept of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering
More informationPSA and the Future. Axel Heidenreich, Department of Urology
PSA and the Future Axel Heidenreich, Department of Urology PSA and Prostate Cancer EAU Guideline 2011 PSA is a continuous variable PSA value (ng/ml) risk of PCa, % 0 0.5 6.6 0.6 1 10.1 1.1 2 17.0 2.1 3
More informationSelective Detection of Histologically Aggressive Prostate Cancer
Selective Detection of Histologically Aggressive Prostate An Early Detection Research Network Prediction Model to Reduce Unnecessary Prostate Biopsies With Validation in the Prostate Prevention Trial Stephen
More informationSince the beginning of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era in the. Characteristics of Insignificant Clinical T1c Prostate Tumors
2001 Characteristics of Insignificant Clinical T1c Prostate Tumors A Contemporary Analysis Patrick J. Bastian, M.D. 1 Leslie A. Mangold, B.A., M.S. 1 Jonathan I. Epstein, M.D. 2 Alan W. Partin, M.D., Ph.D.
More informationVedder, Moniek M; de Bekker-Grob, Esther W; Lilja, Hans; Vickers, Andrew J; van Leenders, Geert J L H; Steyerberg, Ewout W; Roobol, Monique J
The Added Value of Percentage of Free to Total Prostate-specific Antigen, PCA3, and a Kallikrein Panel to the ERSPC Risk Calculator for Prostate Cancer in Prescreened Men. Vedder, Moniek M; de Bekker-Grob,
More informationExtent of Prostate-Specific Antigen Contamination in the Spanish Section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC)
european urology 50 (2006) 1234 1240 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Extent of Prostate-Specific Antigen Contamination in the Spanish Section
More informationThe Relationship between Prostate-Specific Antigen and Prostate Cancer Risk: The Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group
Human Cancer Biology The Relationship between Prostate-Specific Antigen and Prostate Cancer Risk: The Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group Clinical Cancer Research Andrew J. Vickers 1, Angel M. Cronin 1,
More informationUrological Society of Australia and New Zealand PSA Testing Policy 2009
Executive summary Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand PSA Testing Policy 2009 1. Prostate cancer is a major health problem and is the second leading cause of male cancer deaths in Australia
More informationPredictive Performance Evaluation
Predictive Performance Evaluation Clinical Performance of the 4Kscore Test to Predict High-grade Prostate Cancer at Biopsy: A Meta-analysis of US and European Clinical Validation Study Results Stephen
More information10/2/2018 OBJECTIVES PROSTATE HEALTH BACKGROUND THE PROSTATE HEALTH INDEX PHI*: BETTER PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION
THE PROSTATE HEALTH INDEX PHI*: BETTER PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION Lenette Walters, MS, MT(ASCP) Medical Affairs Manager Beckman Coulter, Inc. *phi is a calculation using the values from PSA, fpsa and p2psa
More informationPROSTATE CANCER SCREENING: AN UPDATE
PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING: AN UPDATE William G. Nelson, M.D., Ph.D. Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins American Association for Cancer Research William G. Nelson, M.D., Ph.D. Disclosures
More informationOwing to the widespread use of prostate specific antigen (PSA)
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Subsequent prostate cancer detection in patients with prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical small acinar proliferation Moamen M. Amin, MD; Suganthiny Jeyaganth, MSc; Nader Fahmy,
More informationCorporate Medical Policy
Corporate Medical Policy Saturation Biopsy for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Prostate File Name: Origination: Last CAP Review: Next CAP Review: Last Review: saturation_biopsy_for_diagnosis_ staging_and_management_of_prostate_cancer
More informationFocus on... Prostate Health Index (PHI) Proven To Outperform Traditional PSA Screening In Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
Focus on... Prostate Health Index (PHI) Proven To Outperform Traditional PSA Screening In Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Prostate Cancer in Ireland & Worldwide In Ireland, prostate cancer
More informationAlthough the test that measures total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been
ORIGINAL ARTICLE STEPHEN LIEBERMAN, MD Chief of Urology Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region Clackamas, OR Effective Clinical Practice. 1999;2:266 271 Can Percent Free Prostate-Specific Antigen Reduce the
More informationPredictive Models. Michael W. Kattan, Ph.D. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences and Glickman Urologic and Kidney Institute
Predictive Models Michael W. Kattan, Ph.D. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences and Glickman Urologic and Kidney Institute Treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer Trade off: Substantial
More informationEUROPEAN UROLOGY 61 (2012)
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 61 (2012) 480 487 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by A. Heidenreich on pp. 488 490 of this issue
More informationActive Surveillance (AS) is an expectant management. Health Services Research
Factors Influencing Selection of Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer Health Services Research Jianyu Liu, Paul R. Womble, Selin Merdan, David C. Miller, James E. Montie, Brian T. Denton on
More informationSaturation Biopsy for Diagnosis and Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer
Saturation Biopsy for Diagnosis and Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer Policy Number: 7.01.121 Last Review: 2/2018 Origination: 8/2006 Next Review: 8/2018 Policy Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas
More informationTo be covered. Screening, early diagnosis, and treatment including Active Surveillance for prostate cancer: where is Europe heading for?
To be covered Screening, early diagnosis, and treatment including Active Surveillance for prostate cancer: where is Europe heading for? Europa Uomo meeting Stockholm 29 Chris H.Bangma Rotterdam, The Netherlands
More information1. Introduction. Correspondence should be addressed to Zhongcheng Xin; and Liqun Zhou;
BioMed Research International Volume 2015, Article ID 596797, 7 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/596797 Clinical Study Prevalence and Risk Factors of Prostate Cancer in Chinese Men with PSA 4 10 ng/ml
More informationLong-Term Risk of Clinical Progression After Biochemical Recurrence Following Radical Prostatectomy: The Impact of Time from Surgery to Recurrence
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 59 (2011) 893 899 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by Bertrand D. Guillonneau and Karim Fizazi on
More informationProstate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Test
Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) Test What is the PSA test? Prostate-specific antigen, or PSA, is a protein produced by normal, as well as malignant, cells of the prostate gland. The PSA test measures the
More informationApproximately 680,000 men are diagnosed with prostate
Prediction of Indolent Prostate Cancer: Validation and Updating of a Prognostic Nomogram E. W. Steyerberg,* M. J. Roobol, M. W. Kattan, T. H. van der Kwast, H. J. de Koning and F. H. Schröder From the
More informationSaturation Biopsy for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Prostate Cancer
Saturation Biopsy for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Prostate Cancer Applies to all products administered or underwritten by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Louisiana and its subsidiary, HMO Louisiana,
More informationMR-US Fusion Guided Biopsy: Is it fulfilling expectations?
MR-US Fusion Guided Biopsy: Is it fulfilling expectations? Kenneth L. Gage MD, PhD Assistant Member Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology 4 th Annual New Frontiers in Urologic Oncology
More informationHead-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
Original Article Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome Nuno Pereira-Azevedo 1,2 *, Jan F. M. Verbeek 1 *, Daan Nieboer 1,3, Chris H. Bangma 1, Monique J.
More informationNomogram using transrectal ultrasound-derived information predicting the detection of high grade prostate cancer on initial biopsy
Original Article Prostate Int 2013;1(2):69-75 P R O S T A T E INTERNATIONAL Nomogram using transrectal ultrasound-derived information predicting the detection of high grade prostate cancer on initial biopsy
More informationSaturation Biopsy for Diagnosis and Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer
Saturation Biopsy for Diagnosis and Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer Policy Number: 7.01.121 Last Review: 2/2019 Origination: 8/2006 Next Review: 8/2019 Policy Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas
More informationSensitivity, specicity, ROC
Sensitivity, specicity, ROC Thomas Alexander Gerds Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen 1 / 53 Epilog: disease prevalence The prevalence is the proportion of cases in the population today.
More informationClinical Evaluation of the PCA3 Assay in Guiding Initial Biopsy Decisions
Clinical Evaluation of the PCA3 Assay in Guiding Initial Biopsy Decisions Alexandre de la Taille,*, Jacques Irani, Markus Graefen, Felix Chun, Theo de Reijke, Paul Kil, Paolo Gontero, Alain Mottaz and
More informationSupplementary Material
Supplementary Material Identification of mir-187 and mir-182 as biomarkers for early diagnosis and prognosis in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy Irene Casanova-Salas 1, José
More informationThe index of prediction accuracy: an intuitive measure useful for evaluating risk prediction models
Kattan and Gerds Diagnostic and Prognostic Research (2018) 2:7 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41512-018-0029-2 Diagnostic and Prognostic Research METHODOLOGY Open Access The index of prediction accuracy: an
More informationEUROPEAN UROLOGY 56 (2009)
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 56 (2009) 584 591 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Platinum Priority Prostate Cancer Editorial by Peter Albertsen on pp. 592 593 of this issue
More information1. Introduction. Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba , Japan 2
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Prostate Cancer Volume 2011, Article ID 754382, 6 pages doi:10.1155/2011/754382 Clinical Study Development and External Validation of a Nomogram Predicting the Probability
More informationand integrated discrimination improvement were measured. The method of Begg and Greenes was used to adjust for verification bias.
BJUI BJU INTERNATIONAL An examination of the dynamic changes in prostate-specific antigen occurring in a population-based cohort of men over time Brant A. Inman, Jingyu Zhang *, Nilay D. Shah and Brian
More informationContribution of prostate-specific antigen density in the prediction of prostate cancer: Does prostate volume matter?
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Gulhane Med J 2018;60: 14-18 Gülhane Faculty of Medicine 2018 doi: 10.26657/gulhane.00010 Contribution of prostate-specific antigen density in the prediction of prostate cancer: Does prostate
More informationFalse-positive screening results in the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer
E U RO P E A N J O U R NA L O F CA N C E R47 (2011) 2698 2705 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.ejconline.com False-positive screening results in the European randomized study of
More informationOverall Survival in the Intervention Arm of a Randomized Controlled Screening Trial for Prostate Cancer Compared with a Clinically Diagnosed Cohort
european urology 53 (2008) 91 98 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer Overall Survival in the Intervention Arm of a Randomized Controlled Screening
More informationONCOLOGY LETTERS 8: , 2014
1834 Systematic 12 and 13 core transrectal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsies significantly improve prostate cancer detection rate: A single center 13 year experience GONG CHENG *,
More informationIntroduction. Key Words: high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, HGPIN, radical prostatectomy, prostate biopsy, insignificant prostate cancer
Prostate cancer after initial high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and benign prostate biopsy Premal Patel, MD, 1 Jasmir G. Nayak, MD, 1,2 Zlatica Biljetina, MD, 4 Bryan Donnelly, MD 3, Kiril
More informationHealth Screening Update: Prostate Cancer Zamip Patel, MD FSACOFP Convention August 1 st, 2015
Health Screening Update: Prostate Cancer Zamip Patel, MD FSACOFP Convention August 1 st, 2015 Outline Epidemiology of prostate cancer Purpose of screening Method of screening Contemporary screening trials
More informationNet benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests
open access Net benefit approaches to the evaluation of prediction models, molecular markers, and diagnostic tests Andrew J Vickers, 1 Ben Van Calster, 2,3 Ewout W Steyerberg 3 1 Department of Epidemiology
More informationImproving multivariable prostate cancer risk assessment using the Prostate Health Index
Improving multivariable prostate cancer risk assessment using the Prostate Health Index Robert W. Foley*, Laura Gorman*, Neda Sharifi, Keefe Murphy, Helen Moore, lexandra V. Tuzova**, ntoinette S. Perry**,
More informationImproving Patient Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment: Moving From Static, Globally- Applied to Dynamic, Practice-Specific Cancer Risk Calculators
Improving Patient Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment: Moving From Static, Globally- Applied to Dynamic, Practice-Specific Cancer Risk Calculators Andreas N. Strobl, Andrew J. Vickers, Ben van Calster, Ewout
More informationOutcomes of Radical Prostatectomy in Thai Men with Prostate Cancer
Original Article Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy in Thai Men with Prostate Cancer Sunai Leewansangtong, Suchai Soontrapa, Chaiyong Nualyong, Sittiporn Srinualnad, Tawatchai Taweemonkongsap and Teerapon
More informationExternal validation of the Briganti nomogram to estimate the probability of specimen-confined disease in patients with high-risk prostate cancer
External validation of the Briganti nomogram to estimate the probability of specimen-confined disease in patients with high-risk prostate cancer Mathieu Roumiguié, Jean-Baptiste Beauval, Thomas Filleron*,
More informationDevelopment and internal validation of PI- RADs v2-based model for clinically significant prostate cancer
Zhang et al. World Journal of Surgical Oncology (2018) 16:102 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1367-9 RESEARCH Open Access Development and internal validation of PI- RADs v2-based model for clinically
More informationHigh Incidence of Prostate Cancer Detected by Saturation Biopsy after Previous Negative Biopsy Series
european urology 50 (2006) 498 505 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer High Incidence of Prostate Cancer Detected by Saturation Biopsy after Previous
More informationPREDICTION OF PROSTATE CANCER PROGRESSION
EVALUATION OF PROSTAE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN (PSA) KINETICS IN PREDICTION OF PROSTATE CANCER PROGRESSION by Dongyu Zhang A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for
More informationDiagnostic Value of Finger-guided Prostate Nodule Biopsy Combined With Systemic Random Biopsy
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Diagnostic Value of Finger-guided Prostate Nodule Biopsy Combined With Systemic Random Biopsy I-Ni Chiang, 1,2 Shang-Jen Chang, 3 Yeong-Shiau Pu, 1,2 Kuo-How Huang, 1,2 Hong-Jen Yu, 1,2
More informationScreening and Risk Stratification of Men for Prostate Cancer Metastasis and Mortality
Screening and Risk Stratification of Men for Prostate Cancer Metastasis and Mortality Sanoj Punnen, MD, MAS Assistant Professor of Urologic Oncology University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine and Sylvester
More informationMr Declan Cahill Consultant Urological Surgeon The Royal Marsden
Diagnosing prostate cancer Mr Declan Cahill Consultant Urological Surgeon 2 Marsden GP Education Day 22 February 2016 Should I have a PSA test? Can I have a PSA test? prostatecanceruk.org 4 83% raised
More information4Kscore. A Precision Test for Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer
4Kscore A Precision Test for Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer How to Evaluate Risk for Prostate Cancer? PSA is a good screening tool But abnormal PSA leads to over 1 million prostate biopsies each year
More informationMAKE REPEAT PROSTATE BIOPSY DECISIONS WITH CONFIDENCE. The Progensa PCA3 test
MAKE REPEAT PROSTATE BIOPSY DECISIONS WITH CONFIDENCE The Progensa PCA3 test is the first FDA-approved prostate cancer-specific test of its kind that gives you the information you need to determine if
More informationRegional difference in cancer detection rate in prostate cancer screening by a local municipality in Japan
Original Article Prostate Int 14;2(1):19- http://dx.doi.org/.12954/pi.135 P ROSTATE INTERNATIONAL Regional difference in cancer detection rate in prostate cancer screening by a local municipality in Japan
More informationFinasteride Does Not Increase the Risk of High-grade Prostate Cancer: A Biasadjusted. Mary W. Redman, Ph.D. 1. Catherine M. Tangen, Dr.
Finasteride Does Not Increase the Risk of High-grade Prostate Cancer: A Biasadjusted Modeling Approach Mary W. Redman, Ph.D. 1 Catherine M. Tangen, Dr. PH 1 Phyllis J. Goodman, MS 1 Howard Parnes, M.D.
More informationPSA To screen or not to screen? Darrel Drachenberg, MD, FRCSC
PSA To screen or not to screen? Darrel Drachenberg, MD, FRCSC Disclosures Faculty / Speaker s name: Darrel Drachenberg Relationships with commercial interests: Grants/Research Support: None Speakers Bureau/Honoraria:
More informationEUROPEAN UROLOGY 60 (2011)
EUROPEAN UROLOGY 60 (2011) 834 841 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer The Optimal Rebiopsy Prostatic Scheme Depends on Patient Clinical Characteristics:
More information(2015) : 85 (5) ISSN
Boniol, Mathieu and Autier, Philippe and Perrin, Paul and Boyle, Peter (2015) Variation of prostate-specific antigen value in men and risk of high-grade prostate vancer : analysis of the prostate, lung,
More informationNomogram for Prediction of Prostate Cancer with Serum Prostate Specific Antigen Less than 10 ng/ml
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Oncology & Hematology http://dx.doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.3.338 J Korean Med Sci 2014; 29: 338-342 Nomogram for Prediction of Prostate Cancer with Serum Prostate Specific Antigen Less
More informationThe Actual Value of the Surgical Margin Status as a Predictor of Disease Progression in Men with Early Prostate Cancer
european urology 50 (2006) 258 265 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.europeanurology.com Prostate Cancer The Actual Value of the Surgical Margin Status as a Predictor of Disease
More informationCONTEMPORARY UPDATE OF PROSTATE CANCER STAGING NOMOGRAMS (PARTIN TABLES) FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM
RAPID COMMUNICATION CME ARTICLE CONTEMPORARY UPDATE OF PROSTATE CANCER STAGING NOMOGRAMS (PARTIN TABLES) FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM ALAN W. PARTIN, LESLIE A. MANGOLD, DANA M. LAMM, PATRICK C. WALSH, JONATHAN
More informationDevelopment and Validation of a Nomogram to Estimate the Risk of Prostate Cancer in Brazil
Development and Validation of a Nomogram to Estimate the Risk of Prostate Cancer in Brazil THIAGO B. SILVA 1, CLEYTON Z. OLIVEIRA 2, ELINEY F. FARIA 3, EDMUNDO C. MAUAD 1, KARI J. SYRJÄNEN 2,4 and ANDRÉ
More informationDIAGNOSTICS ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME
DIAGNOSTICS ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME Evidence overview Diagnosis and monitoring of prostate cancer: PROGENSA PCA3 assay and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) This overview summarises the key issues for the Diagnostics
More informationElevated PSA. Dr.Nesaretnam Barr Kumarakulasinghe Associate Consultant Medical Oncology National University Cancer Institute, Singapore 9 th July 2017
Elevated PSA Dr.Nesaretnam Barr Kumarakulasinghe Associate Consultant Medical Oncology National University Cancer Institute, Singapore 9 th July 2017 Issues we will cover today.. The measurement of PSA,
More informationTRUS Guided Transrectal Prostate Biopsy
TRUS Guided Transrectal Prostate Biopsy Will this be a technique of the past? Christopher Porter MD FACS, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle Outline Will this book be obsolete? Old school Elevated
More informationUnderstanding the risk of recurrence after primary treatment for prostate cancer. Aditya Bagrodia, MD
Understanding the risk of recurrence after primary treatment for prostate cancer Aditya Bagrodia, MD Aditya.bagrodia@utsouthwestern.edu 423-967-5848 Outline and objectives Prostate cancer demographics
More informationHorizon Scanning Technology Briefing. Prostate cancer gene 3 (Progensa PCA3) assay in the diagnosis of prostate cancer
Horizon Scanning Technology Briefing National Horizon Scanning Centre Prostate cancer gene 3 (Progensa PCA3) assay in the diagnosis of prostate cancer December 2006 This technology summary is based on
More informationReducing overtreatment of prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy in Eastern Ontario: a population-based cohort study
Reducing overtreatment of prostate cancer by radical prostatectomy in Eastern Ontario: a population-based cohort study Luke Witherspoon MD MSc, Johnathan L. Lau BSc, Rodney H. Breau MD MSc, Christopher
More informationAVOID A POTENTIALLY UNNECESSARY REPEAT PROSTATE BIOPSY. The Progensa PCA3 test
AVOID A POTENTIALLY UNNECESSARY REPEAT PROSTATE BIOPSY The Progensa PCA3 test is the first FDA-approved prostate cancer-specific test of its kind that helps you and your doctor decide if a repeat biopsy
More informationBJUI. Follow-up of men with an elevated PCA3 score and a negative biopsy: does an elevated PCA3 score indeed predict the presence of prostate cancer?
. JOURNAL COMPILATION 2010 BJU INTERNATIONAL Urological Oncology FOLLOW-UP OF MEN WITH AN ELEVATED PCA3 SCORE AND A NEGATIVE BIOPSY REMZI ET AL. BJUI BJU INTERNATIONAL Follow-up of men with an elevated
More informationComparison of three mathematical prediction models in patients with a solitary pulmonary nodule
Original Article Comparison of three mathematical prediction models in patients with a solitary pulmonary nodule Xuan Zhang*, Hong-Hong Yan, Jun-Tao Lin, Ze-Hua Wu, Jia Liu, Xu-Wei Cao, Xue-Ning Yang From
More informationThe Chances of Subsequent Cancer Detection in Patients with a PSA > 20 ng/ml and an Initial Negative Biopsy
Research Article TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2009) 9, 343 348 TSW Urology ISSN 1537-744X; DOI 10.1100/tsw.2009.47 The Chances of Subsequent Cancer Detection in Patients with a PSA > 20 ng/ml and an Initial
More informationProtein Biomarkers for Screening, Detection, and/or Management of Prostate Cancer
Medical Policy Manual Laboratory, Policy No. 69 Protein Biomarkers for Screening, Detection, and/or Management of Prostate Cancer Next Review: October 2018 Last Review: December 2017 Effective: January
More information