Literature DB >> 28152172

The ABC model of prostate cancer: A conceptual framework for the design and interpretation of prognostic studies.

Andreas Pettersson1,2, Travis Gerke1,3, Katja Fall4, Yudi Pawitan5, Lars Holmberg6, Edward L Giovannucci1,7,8, Philip W Kantoff9,10, Hans-Olov Adami1,5, Jennifer R Rider1,11, Lorelei A Mucci1,8.   

Abstract

There has been limited success in identifying prognostic biomarkers in prostate cancer. A partial explanation may be that insufficient emphasis has been put on clearly defining what type of marker or patient category a biomarker study aims to identify and how different cohort characteristics affect the ability to identify such a marker. In this article, the authors put forth the ABC model of prostate cancer, which defines 3 groups of patients with localized disease that an investigator may seek to identify: patients who, within a given time frame, will not develop metastases even if untreated (category A), will not develop metastases because of radical treatment (category B), or will develop metastases despite radical treatment (category C). The authors demonstrate that follow-up time and prostate-specific antigen screening intensity influence the prevalence of patients in categories A, B, and C in a study cohort, and that prognostic markers must be tested in both treated and untreated cohorts to accurately distinguish the 3 groups. The authors suggest that more emphasis should be put on considering these factors when planning, conducting, and interpreting the results from prostate cancer biomarker studies, and propose the ABC model as a framework to aid in that process. Cancer 2017;123:1490-1496.
© 2017 American Cancer Society. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomarkers; epidemiology; predictive markers; prognostic markers; prostate cancer; survival

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28152172      PMCID: PMC5716345          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  10 in total

1.  Recurrent fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Scott A Tomlins; Daniel R Rhodes; Sven Perner; Saravana M Dhanasekaran; Rohit Mehra; Xiao-Wei Sun; Sooryanarayana Varambally; Xuhong Cao; Joelle Tchinda; Rainer Kuefer; Charles Lee; James E Montie; Rajal B Shah; Kenneth J Pienta; Mark A Rubin; Arul M Chinnaiyan
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-10-28       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 2.  Prognostic markers under watchful waiting and radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Lars Holmberg; Anna Bill-Axelson; Hans Garmo; Juni Palmgren; Bo Johan Norlén; Hans Olov Adami; Jan Erik Johansson
Journal:  Hematol Oncol Clin North Am       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.722

3.  Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Michael K Brawer; Karen M Jones; Michael J Barry; William J Aronson; Steven Fox; Jeffrey R Gingrich; John T Wei; Patricia Gilhooly; B Mayer Grob; Imad Nsouli; Padmini Iyer; Ruben Cartagena; Glenn Snider; Claus Roehrborn; Roohollah Sharifi; William Blank; Parikshit Pandya; Gerald L Andriole; Daniel Culkin; Thomas Wheeler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  The TMPRSS2:ERG rearrangement, ERG expression, and prostate cancer outcomes: a cohort study and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andreas Pettersson; Rebecca E Graff; Scott R Bauer; Michael J Pitt; Rosina T Lis; Edward C Stack; Neil E Martin; Lauren Kunz; Kathryn L Penney; Azra H Ligon; Catherine Suppan; Richard Flavin; Howard D Sesso; Jennifer R Rider; Christopher Sweeney; Meir J Stampfer; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Philip W Kantoff; Martin G Sanda; Edward L Giovannucci; Eric L Ding; Massimo Loda; Lorelei A Mucci
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 5.  Proceedings: The natural history of prostatic cancer.

Authors:  W F Whitmore
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1973-11       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 6.  The high prevalence of undiagnosed prostate cancer at autopsy: implications for epidemiology and treatment of prostate cancer in the Prostate-specific Antigen-era.

Authors:  Jaquelyn L Jahn; Edward L Giovannucci; Meir J Stampfer
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  The biologic dilemma of early carcinoma of the prostate.

Authors:  A C von Eschenbach
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1996-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  The Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial:VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Michael K Brawer; Michael J Barry; Karen M Jones; Young Kwon; Jeffrey R Gingrich; William J Aronson; Imad Nsouli; Padmini Iyer; Ruben Cartagena; Glenn Snider; Claus Roehrborn; Steven Fox
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2008-08-23       Impact factor: 2.226

9.  Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial.

Authors:  Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Frej Filén; Mirja Ruutu; Hans Garmo; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Stefan Bratell; Anders Spångberg; Juni Palmgren; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-08-11       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer.

Authors:  Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Hans Garmo; Jennifer R Rider; Kimmo Taari; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Anders Spångberg; Ove Andrén; Juni Palmgren; Gunnar Steineck; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 91.245

  10 in total
  5 in total

1.  MYC Overexpression at the Protein and mRNA Level and Cancer Outcomes among Men Treated with Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Andreas Pettersson; Travis Gerke; Kathryn L Penney; Rosina T Lis; Edward C Stack; Nelma Pértega-Gomes; Giorgia Zadra; Svitlana Tyekucheva; Edward L Giovannucci; Lorelei A Mucci; Massimo Loda
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 2.  Nanoparticle-based targeted cancer strategies for non-invasive prostate cancer intervention.

Authors:  Nicholas H Farina; Areg Zingiryan; Michael A Vrolijk; Scott D Perrapato; Steven Ades; Gary S Stein; Jane B Lian; Christopher C Landry
Journal:  J Cell Physiol       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 6.384

3.  Aneuploidy drives lethal progression in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Konrad H Stopsack; Charles A Whittaker; Travis A Gerke; Massimo Loda; Philip W Kantoff; Lorelei A Mucci; Angelika Amon
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Aberrant DOCK2, GRASP, HIF3A and PKFP Hypermethylation has Potential as a Prognostic Biomarker for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Marianne T Bjerre; Siri H Strand; Maibritt Nørgaard; Helle Kristensen; Anne Ki Rasmussen; Martin Mørck Mortensen; Jacob Fredsøe; Peter Mouritzen; Benedicte Ulhøi; Torben Ørntoft; Michael Borre; Karina D Sørensen
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2019-03-07       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Impact of active surveillance for prostate cancer on the risk of depression and anxiety.

Authors:  Davidson Sypre; Géraldine Pignot; Rajae Touzani; Patricia Marino; Jochen Walz; Stanislas Rybikowski; Thomas Maubon; Nicolas Branger; Naji Salem; Julien Mancini; Gwenaelle Gravis; Marc-Karim Bendiane; Anne-Deborah Bouhnik
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 4.996

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.