| Literature DB >> 26960325 |
Aseem Anand1,2, Michael J Morris3,4, Steven M Larson4,5, David Minarik6, Andreas Josefsson7, John T Helgstrand8, Peter S Oturai9, Lars Edenbrandt10, Martin Andreas Røder8, Anders Bjartell11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Having performed analytical validation studies, we are now assessing the clinical utility of the upgraded automated Bone Scan Index (BSI) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In the present study, we retrospectively evaluated the discriminatory strength of the automated BSI in predicting overall survival (OS) in mCRPC patients being treated with enzalutamide.Entities:
Keywords: Bone Scan Index (BSI); Bone scan; Enzalutamide; Imaging biomarker; Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)
Year: 2016 PMID: 26960325 PMCID: PMC4785173 DOI: 10.1186/s13550-016-0173-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EJNMMI Res Impact factor: 3.138
Fig. 1Flow chart of evaluable patients available for analyses
Demographic and clinical history of patients that qualified for the survival analysis
| Demographics | Patients evaluable at baseline | Patients evaluable at 12-week treatment follow-up |
|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |
| Median (range) | ||
| Age | 71 (54–84) | 71 (54–84) |
| PSA at diagnosis | 46 (3.7–4625) | 46 (3.7–1018) |
| Primary treatment |
| |
| Radiation therapy | 22 (28) | 19 (30) |
| Radical prostatectomy | 13 (16) | 9 (15) |
| Prior systemic treatment | ||
| Prior ADT | 80 (100) | 62 (100) |
| Prior chemo | 64 (80) | 47 (75) |
| Covariates | Median (range) | |
| PSA (ng/mL) | 157.5 (1.1–5460) | 149 (1.1–5460) |
| ALP (U/L) | 124.3 (41.2–1058) | – |
| HgB (mmol/L) | 7.5 (5.2–10.0) | – |
| BSI | 2.7 (0.01–21.11) | 2.6 (0.01–21.11) |
|
| ||
| Deaths | 56 (70) | 40 (65) |
Non-parametric Kendall’s tau and Spearman correlation of automated BSI against blood-based biomarkers (N = 80)
| Blood-based biomarkers | Kendall’s tau (against BSI) |
| Spearman (against BSI) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSA | 0.30 | 0.00015 | 0.41 | 0.00011 |
| ALP | 0.56 | <0.0001 | 0.64 | <0.0001 |
| HgB | −0.17 | 0.0272 | −0.25 | 0.0265 |
A: C-index analysis of with and without the addition of BSI to blood based biomarkers at baseline. B: C-index analysis of change in BSI and PSA at treatment follow-up
| C-index | Confidence interval | SE | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A. Baseline analysisa (dead/total = 56/80) | |||
| BSI | 0.71 | 0.64–0.77 | 0.03 |
| PSA | 0.65 | 0.57–0.72 | 0.03 |
| ALP | 0.67 | 0.58–0.75 | 0.03 |
| HgB | 0.26 | 0.20–0.32 | 0.03 |
| PSA + ALP + HgB | 0.67 | 0.58–0.74 | 0.03 |
| PSA + ALP + HgB + BSI | 0.72 | 0.64–0.78 | 0.03 |
| B. Change (∆) at week 12 (dead/total = 40/62) | |||
| ∆ BSI | 0.75 | 0.68–0.81 | 0.05 |
| ∆ PSA | 0.73 | 0.66–0.78 | 0.05 |
| ∆ PSA + ∆ BSI | 0.77 | 0.71–0.82 | 0.05 |
aBSI, PSA, ALP, and HgB values were observed skewed and therefore logarithmically transformed
Fig. 2Illustrative example of BSI analysis and PSA change after treatment with enzalutamide at 12-week treatment follow-up. Lesions detected and classified as metastatic by the neural network of the automated EXINI platform for BSI calculation are highlighted in red