PURPOSE: The Partin tables are a nomogram that is widely used to discriminate prostate cancer pathological stages, given common preoperative clinical characteristics. The nomogram is based on patients undergoing radical prostatectomy at The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions. We validated the Partin tables in a large, population based sample. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify patients treated from 2004 to 2005 who underwent radical prostatectomy. The 2007 Partin tables were used to estimate the prevalence of positive lymph nodes, seminal vesicle invasion, extraprostatic extension and organ confined disease in men with prostate cancer in the database using clinical stage, preoperative prostate specific antigen and Gleason score. The discriminative ability of the tables was explored by constructing ROC curves. RESULTS: We identified 11,185 men who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in 2004 to 2005. The Partin tables discriminated well between patient groups at risk for positive lymph nodes and seminal vesicle invasion (AUC 0.77 and 0.74, respectively). The discrimination of extraprostatic extension and organ confined disease was more limited (AUC 0.62 and 0.68, respectively). The AUC for positive lymph nodes was 0.78 in white men, 0.73 in black men and 0.83 in Asian/Pacific Islander men (p = 0.17). The AUC for positive lymph nodes in men 61 years old or younger was 0.80 vs 0.74 in men older than 61 years (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The Partin tables showed excellent discrimination for seminal vesicle invasion and positive lymph nodes. Discrimination of extraprostatic extension and organ confined disease was more limited. The Partin tables performed best in young men.
PURPOSE: The Partin tables are a nomogram that is widely used to discriminate prostate cancer pathological stages, given common preoperative clinical characteristics. The nomogram is based on patients undergoing radical prostatectomy at The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions. We validated the Partin tables in a large, population based sample. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was used to identify patients treated from 2004 to 2005 who underwent radical prostatectomy. The 2007 Partin tables were used to estimate the prevalence of positive lymph nodes, seminal vesicle invasion, extraprostatic extension and organ confined disease in men with prostate cancer in the database using clinical stage, preoperative prostate specific antigen and Gleason score. The discriminative ability of the tables was explored by constructing ROC curves. RESULTS: We identified 11,185 men who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in 2004 to 2005. The Partin tables discriminated well between patient groups at risk for positive lymph nodes and seminal vesicle invasion (AUC 0.77 and 0.74, respectively). The discrimination of extraprostatic extension and organ confined disease was more limited (AUC 0.62 and 0.68, respectively). The AUC for positive lymph nodes was 0.78 in white men, 0.73 in black men and 0.83 in Asian/Pacific Islander men (p = 0.17). The AUC for positive lymph nodes in men 61 years old or younger was 0.80 vs 0.74 in men older than 61 years (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The Partin tables showed excellent discrimination for seminal vesicle invasion and positive lymph nodes. Discrimination of extraprostatic extension and organ confined disease was more limited. The Partin tables performed best in young men.
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
Authors: Ying Huang; Sumit Isharwal; Alexander Haese; Felix K H Chun; Danil V Makarov; Ziding Feng; Misop Han; Elizabeth Humphreys; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Robert W Veltri Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-09-28 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Matthew J Watson; Arvin K George; Mahir Maruf; Thomas P Frye; Akhil Muthigi; Michael Kongnyuy; Subin G Valayil; Peter A Pinto Journal: Future Oncol Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 3.404
Authors: Andrew H Feifer; Elena B Elkin; William T Lowrance; Brian Denton; Lindsay Jacks; David S Yee; Jonathan A Coleman; Vincent P Laudone; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Erkin Ötleş; Brian T Denton; Bo Qu; Adharsh Murali; Selin Merdan; Gregory B Auffenberg; Spencer C Hiller; Brian R Lane; Arvin K George; Karandeep Singh Journal: J Urol Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: John B Eifler; Zhaoyang Feng; Brian M Lin; Michael T Partin; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Misop Han; Jonathan I Epstein; Patrick C Walsh; Bruce J Trock; Alan W Partin Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Melissa E Ho; Sue-Ing Quek; Lawrence D True; Colm Morrissey; Eva Corey; Robert L Vessella; Ruth Dumpit; Peter S Nelson; Erin L Maresh; Vei Mah; Mohammed Alavi; Sara R Kim; Lora Bagryanova; Steve Horvath; David Chia; Lee Goodglick; Alvin Y Liu Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 7.842