Literature DB >> 28111174

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Prostate Health Index and 4-Kallikrein Panel Score in Predicting Overall and High-grade Prostate Cancer.

Giorgio Ivan Russo1, Federica Regis2, Tommaso Castelli2, Vincenzo Favilla2, Salvatore Privitera2, Raimondo Giardina2, Sebastiano Cimino2, Giuseppe Morgia2.   

Abstract

Markers for prostate cancer (PCa) have progressed over recent years. In particular, the prostate health index (PHI) and the 4-kallikrein (4K) panel have been demonstrated to improve the diagnosis of PCa. We aimed to review the diagnostic accuracy of PHI and the 4K panel for PCa detection. We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Academic One File databases until July 2016. We included diagnostic accuracy studies that used PHI or 4K panel for the diagnosis of PCa or high-grade PCa. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Twenty-eight studies including 16,762 patients have been included for the analysis. The pooled data showed a sensitivity of 0.89 and 0.74 for PHI and 4K panel, respectively, for PCa detection and a pooled specificity of 0.34 and 0.60 for PHI and 4K panel, respectively. The derived area under the curve (AUC) from the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) showed an accuracy of 0.76 and 0.72 for PHI and 4K panel respectively. For high-grade PCa detection, the pooled sensitivity was 0.93 and 0.87 for PHI and 4K panel, respectively, whereas the pooled specificity was 0.34 and 0.61 for PHI and 4K panel, respectively. The derived AUC from the HSROC showed an accuracy of 0.82 and 0.81 for PHI and 4K panel, respectively. Both PHI and the 4K panel provided good diagnostic accuracy in detecting overall and high-grade PCa.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Detection; Diagnosis; Markers; PSA; Prostate biopsy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28111174     DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2016.12.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer        ISSN: 1558-7673            Impact factor:   2.872


  15 in total

1.  Clinical performance of the 4Kscore Test to predict high-grade prostate cancer at biopsy: A meta-analysis of us and European clinical validation study results.

Authors:  Stephen M Zappala; Peter T Scardino; David Okrongly; Vincent Linder; Yan Dong
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2017

2.  The importance of plasma arginine level and its downstream metabolites in diagnosing prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ismail Selvi; Halil Basar; Numan Baydilli; Koza Murat; Ozlem Kaymaz
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Differentiating Molecular Risk Assessments for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Benjamin Press; Michael Schulster; Marc A Bjurlin
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2018

Review 4.  Managing high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and atypical glands on prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tosoian; Ridwan Alam; Mark W Ball; H Ballentine Carter; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Prostate cancer detection in patients with prior negative biopsy undergoing cognitive-, robotic- or in-bore MRI target biopsy.

Authors:  Sascha Kaufmann; Giorgio I Russo; Fabian Bamberg; Lorenz Löwe; Giuseppe Morgia; Konstantin Nikolaou; Arnulf Stenzl; Stephan Kruck; Jens Bedke
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-27       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.

Authors:  Derek J Lomas; Hashim U Ahmed
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 7.  Cancer overdiagnosis: a biological challenge and clinical dilemma.

Authors:  Sudhir Srivastava; Eugene J Koay; Alexander D Borowsky; Angelo M De Marzo; Sharmistha Ghosh; Paul D Wagner; Barnett S Kramer
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 60.716

8.  Dietary Consumption of Phenolic Acids and Prostate Cancer: A Case-Control Study in Sicily, Southern Italy.

Authors:  Giorgio Ivan Russo; Daniele Campisi; Marina Di Mauro; Federica Regis; Giulio Reale; Marina Marranzano; Rosalia Ragusa; Tatiana Solinas; Massimo Madonia; Sebastiano Cimino; Giuseppe Morgia
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 4.411

Review 9.  Rethinking prostate cancer screening: could MRI be an alternative screening test?

Authors:  David Eldred-Evans; Henry Tam; Heminder Sokhi; Anwar R Padhani; Mathias Winkler; Hashim U Ahmed
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  Active Surveillance Strategies for Low-Grade Prostate Cancer: Comparative Benefits and Cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  Stella K Kang; Rahul D Mali; Vinay Prabhu; Bart S Ferket; Stacy Loeb
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 29.146

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.