Literature DB >> 16469587

Validation of a nomogram for prediction of side specific extracapsular extension at radical prostatectomy.

Thomas Steuber1, Markus Graefen, Alexander Haese, Andreas Erbersdobler, Felix K-H Chun, Thorsten Schlom, Paul Perrotte, Hartwig Huland, Pierre I Karakiewicz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We have previously have reported a tree structured regression model for predicting SS-ECE. Others recently reported a logistic regression based SS-ECE nomogram. We developed a nomogram and compared the performance and discriminant properties of the tree regression and the nomogram in a contemporary cohort of European patients treated with radical retropubic prostatectomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort consisted of 1,118 patients with pretreatment prostate specific antigen 0.1 to 73.2 ng/ml (median 6.6). Each of the 2,236 prostate lobes was considered separately. Clinical stage, pretreatment PSA, biopsy Gleason sum, percent positive cores and percent cancer in the biopsy specimen were used as predictors in a logistic regression model predicting SS-ECE. Regression coefficients were then used to generate an SS-ECE nomogram. Performance characteristics and discriminant properties of the previously published tree regression were also tested in the same cohort. For internal validation and to decrease overfit bias 200 bootstrap re-samples were applied to accuracy estimates for each method.
RESULTS: ECE was present in 303 of 1,118 radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens (27%) and in 385 lobes (17%). In logistic regression models all variables were statistically significant multivariate predictors of SS-ECE except the percent of positive biopsy cores (p = 0.7). Bootstrap corrected predictive accuracy of the SS-ECE nomogram was 0.840 vs 0.700 for the tree regression model.
CONCLUSIONS: Logistic regression based nomogram predictions of SS-ECE are highly accurate and represent a valuable aid for assessing the risk of ECE prior to surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16469587     DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00342-3

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


  26 in total

Review 1.  Predictive and prognostic models in radical prostatectomy candidates: a critical analysis of the literature.

Authors:  Giovanni Lughezzani; Alberto Briganti; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Michael W Kattan; Francesco Montorsi; Shahrokh F Shariat; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-08-06       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  Role of nomograms for prostate cancer in 2007.

Authors:  Felix K-H Chun; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Unmet needs in the prediction and detection of metastases in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Oliver Sartor; Mario Eisenberger; Michael W Kattan; Bertrand Tombal; Frederic Lecouvet
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2013-05-06

Review 4.  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

5.  Use of nomograms for predictions of outcome in patients with advanced bladder cancer.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Guilherme Godoy; Seth P Lerner
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2009-04

6.  Prostate cancer: Nerve-sparing surgery and risk of positive surgical margins.

Authors:  Katharina Boehm; Markus Graefen
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 7.  [Prostate gland - what would urologists like to know from radiologists?]

Authors:  U B Liehr; D Baumunk; S Blaschke; F Fischbach; B Friebe; F König; A Lemke; P Mittelstädt; M Pech; M Porsch; J Ricke; D Schindele; S Siedentopf; J J Wendler; M Schostak
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 0.635

8.  Safe-R: a novel score, accounting for oncological safe nerve-sparing at radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Andreas Becker; Carolina Coelius; Meike Adam; Pierre Tennstedt; Luis Kluth; Thomas Steuber; Hans Heinzer; Markus Graefen; Thorsten Schlomm; Uwe Michl
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  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

10.  [Systematic analysis of treatment results as a quality control instrument using the example of a large European center].

Authors:  B Beyer; H Huland; M Graefen
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.