Literature DB >> 27349564

Prostate health index (PHI) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) predictive models for prostate cancer in the Chinese population and the role of digital rectal examination-estimated prostate volume.

Peter K F Chiu1, Monique J Roobol2, Jeremy Y Teoh1, Wai-Man Lee1, Siu-Ying Yip1, See-Ming Hou1, Chris H Bangma2, Chi-Fai Ng3,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate PSA- and PHI (prostate health index)-based models for prediction of prostate cancer (PCa) and the feasibility of using DRE-estimated prostate volume (DRE-PV) in the models.
METHODS: This study included 569 Chinese men with PSA 4-10 ng/mL and non-suspicious DRE with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) 10-core prostate biopsies performed between April 2008 and July 2015. DRE-PV was estimated using 3 pre-defined classes: 25, 40, or 60 ml. The performance of PSA-based and PHI-based predictive models including age, DRE-PV, and TRUS prostate volume (TRUS-PV) was analyzed using logistic regression and area under the receiver operating curves (AUC), in both the whole cohort and the screening age group of 55-75.
RESULTS: PCa and high-grade PCa (HGPCa) was diagnosed in 10.9 % (62/569) and 2.8 % (16/569) men, respectively. The performance of DRE-PV-based models was similar to TRUS-PV-based models. In the age group 55-75, the AUCs for PCa of PSA alone, PSA with DRE-PV and age, PHI alone, PHI with DRE-PV and age, and PHI with TRUS-PV and age were 0.54, 0.71, 0.76, 0.78, and 0.78, respectively. The corresponding AUCs for HGPCa were higher (0.60, 0.70, 0.85, 0.83, and 0.83). At 10 and 20 % risk threshold for PCa, 38.4 and 55.4 % biopsies could be avoided in the PHI-based model, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: PHI had better performance over PSA-based models and could reduce unnecessary biopsies. A DRE-assessed PV can replace TRUS-assessed PV in multivariate prediction models to facilitate clinical use.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Prostate cancer; Prostate health index; Prostate volume; Prostate-specific antigen; Rectal examination; Risk calculator

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27349564     DOI: 10.1007/s11255-016-1350-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol        ISSN: 0301-1623            Impact factor:   2.370


  19 in total

1.  Is it effective to perform two more prostate biopsies according to prostate-specific antigen level and prostate volume in detecting prostate cancer? Prospective study of 10-core and 12-core prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Byung Il Yoon; Tae Seung Shin; Hyuk Jin Cho; Sung-Hoo Hong; Ji Youl Lee; Tae-Kon Hwang; Sae Woong Kim
Journal:  Urol J       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.510

2.  Accuracy of prostate weight estimation by digital rectal examination versus transrectal ultrasonography.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Misop Han; Kimberly A Roehl; Jo Ann V Antenor; William J Catalona
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 3.  The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; William C Allsbrook; Mahul B Amin; Lars L Egevad
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.394

4.  Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator 2.0 for the prediction of low- vs high-grade prostate cancer.

Authors:  Donna P Ankerst; Josef Hoefler; Sebastian Bock; Phyllis J Goodman; Andrew Vickers; Javier Hernandez; Lori J Sokoll; Martin G Sanda; John T Wei; Robin J Leach; Ian M Thompson
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Prediction of prostate cancer risk: the role of prostate volume and digital rectal examination in the ERSPC risk calculators.

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Heidi A van Vugt; Stacy Loeb; Xiaoye Zhu; Meelan Bul; Chris H Bangma; Arno G L J H van Leenders; Ewout W Steyerberg; Fritz H Schröder
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 6.  Common gene rearrangements in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mark A Rubin; Christopher A Maher; Arul M Chinnaiyan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial.

Authors:  Gerald L Andriole; E David Crawford; Robert L Grubb; Saundra S Buys; David Chia; Timothy R Church; Mona N Fouad; Edward P Gelmann; Paul A Kvale; Douglas J Reding; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Barbara O'Brien; Jonathan D Clapp; Joshua M Rathmell; Thomas L Riley; Richard B Hayes; Barnett S Kramer; Grant Izmirlian; Anthony B Miller; Paul F Pinsky; Philip C Prorok; John K Gohagan; Christine D Berg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Development and internal validation of a Prostate Health Index based nomogram for predicting prostate cancer at extended biopsy.

Authors:  Giovanni Lughezzani; Massimo Lazzeri; Alessandro Larcher; Giuliana Lista; Vincenzo Scattoni; Andrea Cestari; Nicoló Maria Buffi; Vittorio Bini; Giorgio Guazzoni
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis.

Authors:  Ries Kranse; Monique Roobol; Fritz H Schröder
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2008-11-01       Impact factor: 4.104

10.  Comparison of Two Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators that Include the Prostate Health Index.

Authors:  Monique J Roobol; Moniek M Vedder; Daan Nieboer; Alain Houlgatte; Sébastien Vincendeau; Massimo Lazzeri; Giorgio Guazzoni; Carsten Stephan; Axel Semjonow; Alexander Haese; Markus Graefen; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2015-06-23
View more
  10 in total

1.  Assessment of men's risk thresholds to proceed with prostate biopsy for the early detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kevin Koo; Elias S Hyams
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Economic evaluation of the introduction of the Prostate Health Index as a rule-out test to avoid unnecessary biopsies in men with prostate specific antigen levels of 4-10 in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Janet Bouttell; Jeremy Teoh; Peter K Chiu; Kevin S Chan; Chi-Fai Ng; Robert Heggie; Neil Hawkins
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-16       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  Phi-based risk calculators performed better in the prediction of prostate cancer in the Chinese population.

Authors:  Yi-Shuo Wu; Xiao-Jian Fu; Rong Na; Ding-Wei Ye; Jun Qi; Xiao-Ling Lin; Fang Liu; Jian Gong; Ning Zhang; Guang-Liang Jiang; Hao-Wen Jiang; Qiang Ding; Jianfeng Xu; Ying-Hao Sun
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.285

4.  Prostate volume does not provide additional predictive value to prostate health index for prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer: results from a multicenter study in China.

Authors:  Da Huang; Yi-Shuo Wu; Ding-Wei Ye; Jun Qi; Fang Liu; Brian T Helfand; Siqun L Zheng; Qiang Ding; Dan-Feng Xu; Rong Na; Jian-Feng Xu; Ying-Hao Sun
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2020 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.285

5.  Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Prostate Cancer: Exploring New Developments in Testing and Diagnosis.

Authors:  Edna Keeney; Howard Thom; Emma Turner; Richard M Martin; Josie Morley; Sabina Sanghera
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  Usefulness of the prostate health index in predicting the presence and aggressiveness of prostate cancer among Korean men: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Jae Yoon Kim; Ji Hyeong Yu; Luck Hee Sung; Dae Yeon Cho; Hyun-Jung Kim; Soo Jin Yoo
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 7.  Blood and urine biomarkers in prostate cancer: Are we ready for reflex testing in men with an elevated prostate-specific antigen?

Authors:  Edward K Chang; Adam J Gadzinski; Yaw A Nyame
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2021-06-23

8.  A Germline Variant at 8q24 Contributes to the Serum p2PSA Level in a Chinese Prostate Biopsy Cohort.

Authors:  Xiaoling Lin; Yishuo Wu; Fang Liu; Rong Na; Da Huang; Danfeng Xu; Jian Gong; Yao Zhu; Bo Dai; Dingwei Ye; Hongjie Yu; Haowen Jiang; Zujun Fang; Jie Zheng; Qiang Ding
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  Prospective performance of the Prostate Health Index in prostate cancer detection in the first prostate biopsy of men with a total prostatic specific antigen of 4-10 ng/mL and negative digital rectal examination.

Authors:  Supon Sriplakich; Bannakij Lojanapiwat; Wilaiwan Chongruksut; Siwat Phuriyaphan; Pruit Kitirattakarn; Jakrit Jun-Ou; Akara Amantakul
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2018-02-15

Review 10.  Personalized strategies in population screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sebastiaan Remmers; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 7.396

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.