Literature DB >> 17932909

A nomogram for predicting low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer: a tool in selecting patients for active surveillance.

Hiroyuki Nakanishi1, Xuemei Wang, Atsushi Ochiai, Kiril Trpkov, Asli Yilmaz, J Bryan Donnelly, John W Davis, Patricia Troncoso, R Joseph Babaian.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors reported previously that assessment of the number of positive biopsy cores, maximum tumor length in a core, Gleason score, and prostate volume in an extended biopsy enhanced the accuracy of predicting low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer. On the basis of those findings, they developed a nomogram to predict the probability of low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer specifically for men with a single positive biopsy core.
METHODS: The study cohort comprised 258 men who underwent radical prostatectomy without neoadjuvant therapy. Prostate cancer was diagnosed in only 1 core of an extended biopsy scheme. Low-volume/low-grade cancer was defined as pathologic organ-confined disease and a tumor volume<0.5 cc with no Gleason grade 4 or 5 cancer. Patient age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, prostate volume, PSA density (PSAD), and tumor length in a biopsy core were examined as variables. A fitted multiple logistic regression model was used to establish the nomogram.
RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three patients (51.6%) had low-volume/low-grade cancer. To establish the nomogram, age, PSAD, and tumor length were adopted as variables. The fitted model suggested that older age, higher PSAD values, and greater tumor length would reduce the probability of low-volume/low-grade cancer. The nomogram predicted low-volume/low-grade cancer with good discrimination (an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.727). Calibration of this nomogram showed good predicted probability.
CONCLUSIONS: The authors established a nomogram with which to predict low-volume/low-grade cancer in men with 1 positive biopsy core in an extended biopsy scheme, and they recommend this nomogram for use in selecting men for active surveillance. Copyright (c) 2007 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17932909     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  14 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Insignificant disease among men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sung Kyu Hong; Emily Vertosick; Daniel D Sjoberg; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-09-27       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Evaluation of models predicting insignificant prostate cancer to select men for active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Authors:  L M Wong; D E Neal; A Finelli; S Davis; C Bonner; J Kapoor; J Trachtenberg; B Thomas; C M Hovens; A J Costello; N M Corcoran
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 5.554

4.  Six-core versus twelve-core prostate biopsy: a retrospective study comparing accuracy, oncological outcomes and safety.

Authors:  W Mohammed; N F Davis; S Elamin; P Ahern; C M Brady; P Sweeney
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 1.568

5.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: an underutilized opportunity for reducing harm.

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

6.  Disease reclassification risk with stringent criteria and frequent monitoring in men with favourable-risk prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance.

Authors:  John W Davis; John F Ward; Curtis A Pettaway; Xuemei Wang; Deborah Kuban; Steven J Frank; Andrew K Lee; Louis L Pisters; Surena F Matin; Jay B Shah; Jose A Karam; Brian F Chapin; John N Papadopoulos; Mary Achim; Karen E Hoffman; Thomas J Pugh; Seungtaek Choi; Patricia Troncoso; Christopher J Logothetis; Jeri Kim
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2015-07-04       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Can Confirmatory Biopsy be Omitted in Patients with Prostate Cancer Favorable Diagnostic Features on Active Surveillance?

Authors:  Prassannah Satasivam; Bing Ying Poon; Behfar Ehdaie; Andrew J Vickers; James A Eastham
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Radical prostatectomy findings in patients predicted to have low-volume/low-grade prostate cancer diagnosed by extended-core biopsies: an analysis of volume and zonal distribution of tumour foci.

Authors:  John W Davis; Jeri Kim; John F Ward; Xuemai Wang; Hiro Nakanishi; R Joseph Babaian; Patricia Troncoso
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 5.588

9.  Predictive value of four kallikrein markers for pathologically insignificant compared with aggressive prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens: results from the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer section Rotterdam.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Alexandra Maschino; Fritz Schröder; Chris Bangma; Ewout W Steyerberg; Theo van der Kwast; Geert van Leenders; Andrew Vickers; Hans Lilja; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  Associations Between iCOGS Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms and Upgrading in Both Surgical and Active Surveillance Cohorts of Men with Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  James T Kearns; Brittany Lapin; Edward Wang; Kimberly A Roehl; Phillip Cooper; William J Catalona; Brian T Helfand
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.