Literature DB >> 25096341

Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer.

Selin Merdan1, Paul R Womble2, David C Miller2, Christine Barnett1, Zaojun Ye2, Susan M Linsell3, James E Montie2, Brian T Denton4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of published guidelines compared with that of current practice for radiographic staging of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using data from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative clinical registry, we identified 1509 men diagnosed with prostate cancer from March 2012 through June 2013. Clinical data included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score (GS), clinical trial stage, number of biopsy cores, and bone scan (BS) results. We then fit a multivariate logistic regression model to examine the association between clinical variables and the occurrence of bone metastases. Because some patients did not undergo BS, we used established methods to correct for verification bias and estimate the diagnostic accuracy of published guidelines.
RESULTS: Among 416 men who received a BS, 48 (11.5%) had evidence of bone metastases. Patients with bone metastases were older, with higher PSA levels and GS (all P <.05). In multivariate analyses, PSA (P <.001) and GS (P = .004) were the only independent predictors of positive BS. Guidelines from the American Urological Association and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network demonstrated similar performance in detecting bone metastases in our population, with fewer negative study results than those of the European Association of Urology guideline. Applying the American Urological Association recommendations (ie, image when PSA level >20 ng/mL or GS ≥ 8) to current clinical practice, we estimate that <1% of positive study results would be missed, whereas the number of negative study results would be reduced by 38%.
CONCLUSION: Based on current practice patterns, more uniform application of existing guidelines would ensure that BS is performed for almost all men with bone metastases, while avoiding many negative imaging studies.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25096341      PMCID: PMC4755476          DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.06.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  17 in total

1.  Ability of serum prostate-specific antigen levels to predict normal bone scans in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  M E Gleave; D Coupland; D Drachenberg; L Cohen; S Kwong; S L Goldenberg; L D Sullivan
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update.

Authors:  Ian Thompson; James Brantley Thrasher; Gunnar Aus; Arthur L Burnett; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Michael S Cookson; Anthony V D'Amico; Roger R Dmochowski; David T Eton; Jeffrey D Forman; S Larry Goldenberg; Javier Hernandez; Celestia S Higano; Stephen R Kraus; Judd W Moul; Catherine M Tangen
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subject to selection bias.

Authors:  C B Begg; R A Greenes
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Do all patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer need staging radionuclide bone scan? A retrospective study.

Authors:  Mohammed A Al-Ghazo; Ibrahim F Ghalayini; Rami S Al-Azab; Ibrahim Bani-Hani; Alaa Barham; Yazan Haddad
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

5.  A study on staging bone scans in newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  R Ayyathurai; R Mahapatra; R Rajasundaram; V Srinivasan; N P Archard; H Toussi
Journal:  Urol Int       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Influence of local tumour stage and grade on reliability of serum prostate-specific antigen in predicting skeletal metastases in patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

Authors:  G Bruwer; C F Heyns; F J Allen
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Bone scanning--who needs it among patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer?

Authors:  Megumi Hirobe; Atsushi Takahashi; Shin-Ichi Hisasue; Hiroshi Kitamura; Yasuharu Kunishima; Naoya Masumori; Akihiko Iwasawa; Kenji Fujimori; Tadashi Hasegawa; Taiji Tsukamoto
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 3.019

8.  Broadening the criteria for avoiding staging bone scans in prostate cancer: a retrospective study of patients at the Royal Marsden Hospital.

Authors:  J M O'Sullivan; A R Norman; G J Cook; C Fisher; D P Dearnaley
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.588

9.  When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of the currently available guidelines and proposal of a novel risk stratification tool.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Niccolò Passoni; Matteo Ferrari; Umberto Capitanio; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Gallina; Luigi Filippo Da Pozzo; Maria Picchio; Valerio Di Girolamo; Andrea Salonia; Liugi Gianolli; Cristina Messa; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-12-18       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  The utilization of Gleason grade as the primary criterion for ordering nuclear bone scan in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Chad W M Ritenour; John T Abbott; Michael Goodman; Naomi Alazraki; Fray F Marshall; Muta M Issa
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2009-10-02
View more
  11 in total

1.  18F-Choline PET/mpMRI for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Part 2. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Christine L Barnett; Matthew S Davenport; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Lakshmi Priya Kunju; Brian T Denton; Morand Piert
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  Prostate cancer: Better use of bone scans in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Steven M Larson
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  A Bone Scan Is Valuable for Primary Staging of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer in a Low-Resource Setting (Nigeria).

Authors:  Akintunde T Orunmuyi; Sikiru A Adebayo; Olayinka S Ilesanmi; Augustine O Takure; E Oluwabunmi Olapade-Olaopa
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-01-28

4.  Long non-coding RNA ATB promotes growth and epithelial-mesenchymal transition and predicts poor prognosis in human prostate carcinoma.

Authors:  Song Xu; Xiao-Ming Yi; Chao-Peng Tang; Jing-Ping Ge; Zheng-Yu Zhang; Wen-Quan Zhou
Journal:  Oncol Rep       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 3.906

5.  Prospective monitoring of imaging guideline adherence by physicians in a surgical collaborative: comparison of statistical process control methods for detecting outlying performance.

Authors:  Michael Inadomi; Karandeep Singh; Ji Qi; Rodney Dunn; Susan Linsell; Brian Denton; Patrick Hurley; Eduardo Kleer; James Montie; Khurshid R Ghani
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 2.796

6.  North American population-based validation of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Practice Guideline Recommendations for locoregional lymph node and bone imaging in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Felix Preisser; Elio Mazzone; Sebastiano Nazzani; Michele Marchioni; Marco Bandini; Zhe Tian; Fred Saad; Denis Soulières; Shahrokh F Shariat; Francesco Montorsi; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Cost-consequence analysis of 18F-fluciclovine for the staging of recurrent prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ivar S Jensen; Joanne Hathway; Philip Cyr; David Gauden; Peter Gardiner
Journal:  J Mark Access Health Policy       Date:  2020-04-06

Review 8.  Consensus statements on the management of clinically localized prostate cancer from the Hong Kong Urological Association and the Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology.

Authors:  Wai-Kit Ma; Darren Ming-Chun Poon; Chi-Kwok Chan; Tim-Wai Chan; Foon-Yiu Cheung; Lap-Yin Ho; Eric Ka-Chai Lee; Angus Kwong-Chuen Leung; Simon Yiu-Lam Leung; Hing-Shing So; Po-Chor Tam; Philip Wai-Kay Kwong
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2019-02-05       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 9.  The past, present, and future of urological quality improvement collaboratives.

Authors:  Adam C Reese; Serge Ginzburg
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05

Review 10.  The use of long non-coding RNAs as prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Cristian Arriaga-Canon; Inti Alberto De La Rosa-Velázquez; Rodrigo González-Barrios; Rogelio Montiel-Manríquez; Diego Oliva-Rico; Francisco Jiménez-Trejo; Carlo Cortés-González; Luis A Herrera
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2018-04-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.