Literature DB >> 15197788

Algorithms based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, digital rectal examination and prostate volume reduce false-positive PSA results in prostate cancer screening.

Patrik Finne1, Ralf Finne, Chris Bangma, Jonas Hugosson, Matti Hakama, Anssi Auvinen, Ulf-Håkan Stenman.   

Abstract

Our objective was to determine whether multivariate algorithms based on serum total PSA, the free proportion of PSA, age, digital rectal examination and prostate volume can reduce the rate of false-positive PSA results in prostate cancer screening more effectively than the proportion of free PSA alone at 95% sensitivity. A total of 1,775 consecutive 55- to 67-year-old men with a serum PSA of 4-10 microg/l in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer were included. To predict the presence of cancer, multivariate algorithms were constructed using logistic regression (LR) and a multilayer perceptron neural network with Bayesian regularization (BR-MLP). A prospective setting was simulated by dividing the data set chronologically into one set for training and validation (67%, n = 1,183) and one test set (33%, n = 592). The diagnostic models were calibrated using the training set to obtain 95% sensitivity. When applied to the test set, the LR model, the BR-MLP model and the proportion of free PSA reached 92%, 87% and 94% sensitivity and reduced 29%, 36% and 22% of the false-positive PSA results, respectively. At a fixed sensitivity of 95% in the test set, the LR model eliminated more false-positive PSA results (22%) than the proportion of free PSA alone (17%) (p < 0.001), whereas the BR-MLP model did not (19%) (p = 0.178). The area under the ROC curve was larger for the LR model (0.764, p = 0.030) and the BR-MLP model (0.760, p = 0.049) than for the proportion of free PSA (0.718). A multivariate algorithm can be used to reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies in screening more effectively than the proportion of free PSA alone, but the algorithms will require updating when clinical practice develops with time. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15197788     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.20250

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  12 in total

1.  A pilot study evaluating serum pro-prostate-specific antigen in patients with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Antonino Sottile; Cinzia Ortega; Alfredo Berruti; Monica Mangioni; Sara Saponaro; Alessandra Polo; Veronica Prati; Giovanni Muto; Massimo Aglietta; Filippo Montemurro
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 2.967

2.  Using biopsy to detect prostate cancer.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Claus G Roehrborn
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

3.  The value of an artificial neural network in the decision-making for prostate biopsies.

Authors:  R P Meijer; E F A Gemen; I E W van Onna; J C van der Linden; H P Beerlage; G C M Kusters
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2009-06-28       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Artificial neural networks and prostate cancer--tools for diagnosis and management.

Authors:  Xinhai Hu; Henning Cammann; Hellmuth-A Meyer; Kurt Miller; Klaus Jung; Carsten Stephan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Pre-operative prediction of advanced prostatic cancer using clinical decision support systems: accuracy comparison between support vector machine and artificial neural network.

Authors:  Sang Youn Kim; Sung Kyoung Moon; Dae Chul Jung; Sung Il Hwang; Chang Kyu Sung; Jeong Yeon Cho; Seung Hyup Kim; Jiwon Lee; Hak Jong Lee
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 6.  Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Michael W Kattan; Andrew J Vickers; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.404

7.  Image-based clinical decision support for transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: comparison of multiple logistic regression, artificial neural network, and support vector machine.

Authors:  Hak Jong Lee; Sung Il Hwang; Seok-Min Han; Seong Ho Park; Seung Hyup Kim; Jeong Yeon Cho; Chang Gyu Seong; Gheeyoung Choe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Can a supervised algorithmic assessment of men for prostate cancer improve the quality of care? A retrospective evaluation of a prostate assessment pathway in Saskatchewan.

Authors:  Bonnie Liu; Kunal Jana; Gary Groot
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 9.  Prostate cancer screening in Europe and Asia.

Authors:  Kai Zhang; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2016-09-04

10.  Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome.

Authors:  Nuno Pereira-Azevedo; Jan F M Verbeek; Daan Nieboer; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.