Literature DB >> 15879784

Development and validation of a nomogram predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy based on patient age, digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen.

Pierre I Karakiewicz1, Serge Benayoun, Michael W Kattan, Paul Perrotte, Luc Valiquette, Peter T Scardino, Ilias Cagiannos, Hans Heinzer, Simon Tanguay, Armen G Aprikian, Hartwig Huland, Markus Graefen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We developed and validated a nomogram which predicts presence of prostate cancer (PCa) on needle biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used 3 cohorts of men who were evaluated with sextant biopsy of the prostate and whose presenting prostate specific antigen (PSA) was not greater than 50 ng/ml. Data from 4,193 men from Montreal, Canada were used to develop a nomogram based on age, digital rectal examination (DRE) and serum PSA. External validation was performed on 1,762 men from Hamburg, Germany. Data from these men were subsequently used to develop a second nomogram in which percent free PSA (%fPSA) was added as a predictor. External validation was performed using 514 men from Montreal. Both nomograms were based on multivariate logistic regression models. Predictive accuracy was evaluated with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve and graphically with loess smoothing plots.
RESULTS: PCa was detected in 1,477 (35.2%) men from Montreal, 739 (41.9%) men from Hamburg and 189 (36.8%) men from Montreal. In all models all predictors were significant at 0.05. Using age, DRE and PSA external validation AUC was 0.69. Using age, DRE, PSA and %fPSA external validation AUC was 0.77.
CONCLUSIONS: A nomogram based on age, DRE, PSA and %fPSA can highly accurately predict the outcome of prostate biopsy in men at risk for PCa.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15879784      PMCID: PMC1855288          DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000158039.94467.5d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  19 in total

1.  Pretreatment nomogram for prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; J Fondurulia; M H Chen; I Kaplan; C J Beard; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; A Wein; C N Coleman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Novel artificial neural network for early detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bob Djavan; Mesut Remzi; Alexandre Zlotta; Christian Seitz; Peter Snow; Michael Marberger
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-02-15       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; J A Eastham; A M Stapleton; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1998-05-20       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  An algorithm combining age, total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and percent free PSA to predict prostate cancer: results on 4298 cases.

Authors:  G D Carlson; C B Calvanese; A W Partin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Pretreatment nomogram for predicting freedom from recurrence after permanent prostate brachytherapy in prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; L Potters; J C Blasko; D C Beyer; P Fearn; W Cavanagh; S Leibel; P T Scardino
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Pretreatment nomogram for predicting the outcome of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; M J Zelefsky; P A Kupelian; P T Scardino; Z Fuks; S A Leibel
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Comparative evaluation of total PSA, free/total PSA, and complexed PSA in prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  S Tanguay; L R Bégin; M M Elhilali; H Behlouli; P I Karakiewicz; A G Aprikian
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Development of a nomogram that predicts the probability of a positive prostate biopsy in men with an abnormal digital rectal examination and a prostate-specific antigen between 0 and 4 ng/mL.

Authors:  J A Eastham; R May; J L Robertson; O Sartor; M W Kattan
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Assessment of the enhancement in predictive accuracy provided by systematic biopsy in predicting outcome for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Markus Graefen; Makoto Ohori; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Ilias Cagiannos; Peter G Hammerer; Alexander Haese; Andreas Erbersdobler; Rolf-Peter Henke; Hartwig Huland; Thomas M Wheeler; Kevin Slawin; Peter T Scardino; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  44 in total

1.  Using biopsy to detect prostate cancer.

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

2.  Predictive models for newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  William T Lowrance; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2009

Review 3.  Prostate cancer nomograms: a review of their use in cancer detection and treatment.

Authors:  R J Caras; Joseph R Sterbis
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Cancer Progress and Priorities: Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Kevin H Kensler; Timothy R Rebbeck
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 5.  Systematic review of clinical features of suspected prostate cancer in primary care.

Authors:  Sheila-Mae Young; Praveen Bansal; Emily T Vella; Antonio Finelli; Cheryl Levitt; Andrew Loblaw
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 6.  'Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator' mobile applications (Apps): a systematic review and scoring using the validated user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS).

Authors:  Ahmed Adam; Julian C Hellig; Marlon Perera; Damien Bolton; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  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

8.  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

Review 9.  Risk stratification in prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Sigrid V Carlsson
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  Validation in a multiple urology practice cohort of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator for predicting prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Stephen J Eyre; Donna P Ankerst; John T Wei; Prakash V Nair; Meredith M Regan; Gerrardina Bueti; Jeffrey Tang; Mark A Rubin; Michael Kearney; Ian M Thompson; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.450

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.