Yanqing Wang1, Shaowei Xie1,2, Xun Shangguan1, Jiahua Pan1, Yinjie Zhu1, Zhixiang Xin1, Fan Xu1, Xiaoguang Shao1, Liancheng Fan1, Jianjun Sha1, Qiang Liu3, Baijun Dong4, Wei Xue5. 1. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 160 Pujian Road, Pudong District, Shanghai, 200127, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Ultrasound, School of Medicine, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China. 4. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 160 Pujian Road, Pudong District, Shanghai, 200127, People's Republic of China. dongbaijun@renji.com. 5. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 160 Pujian Road, Pudong District, Shanghai, 200127, People's Republic of China. xuewei@renji.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of prostate volume (PV), transitional zone volume (TZV), and prostate volume index (PVI, the ratio of TZV to peripheral zone volume) in the identification of men at risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and high-progression PCa (HPPCa) at the initial biopsy (IBX) in a real-world population. METHODS: From Jul 2014 to Aug 2016, data on 1144 patients who had undergone the initial prostate biopsies were prospectively collected and analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the independent predictors for PCa and HPPCa. Based on independent predictors, nomogram models were developed and internally validated to assess a man's risk of harboring PCa and HPPCa. RESULTS: The detection rates of PCa and HPPCa were 43.09% (493/1144) and 39.16% (448/1144), respectively. In the multivariate analyses, age, PSA, TZV, DRE, and TRUS instead of PV or PVI were independent predictors for PCa and HPPCa, percent free PSA was independent predictor for PCa not for HPPCa. Such independent predictors were finally included in the nomogram models. The AUCs of TZV-based nomogram models were 87.0% for PCa and 87.7% for HPPCa, which were higher than that of PSA alone or other predictive models. CONCLUSIONS: TZV is a better predictive biomarker than PV or PVI for PCa and HPPCa, we recommend adding TZV but not PV or PVI to the nomogram models to improve the predictive accuracy of PCa and HPPCa at IBX.
PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of prostate volume (PV), transitional zone volume (TZV), and prostate volume index (PVI, the ratio of TZV to peripheral zone volume) in the identification of men at risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and high-progression PCa (HPPCa) at the initial biopsy (IBX) in a real-world population. METHODS: From Jul 2014 to Aug 2016, data on 1144 patients who had undergone the initial prostate biopsies were prospectively collected and analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the independent predictors for PCa and HPPCa. Based on independent predictors, nomogram models were developed and internally validated to assess a man's risk of harboring PCa and HPPCa. RESULTS: The detection rates of PCa and HPPCa were 43.09% (493/1144) and 39.16% (448/1144), respectively. In the multivariate analyses, age, PSA, TZV, DRE, and TRUS instead of PV or PVI were independent predictors for PCa and HPPCa, percent free PSA was independent predictor for PCa not for HPPCa. Such independent predictors were finally included in the nomogram models. The AUCs of TZV-based nomogram models were 87.0% for PCa and 87.7% for HPPCa, which were higher than that of PSA alone or other predictive models. CONCLUSIONS:TZV is a better predictive biomarker than PV or PVI for PCa and HPPCa, we recommend adding TZV but not PV or PVI to the nomogram models to improve the predictive accuracy of PCa and HPPCa at IBX.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biopsy; Nomogram; Prostatic neoplasm; Transitional zone volume
Authors: Stephen A Boorjian; R Jeffrey Karnes; Laureano J Rangel; Eric J Bergstralh; Michael L Blute Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Massimo Lazzeri; Alexander Haese; Alexandre de la Taille; Joan Palou Redorta; Thomas McNicholas; Giovanni Lughezzani; Vincenzo Scattoni; Vittorio Bini; Massimo Freschi; Amy Sussman; Bijan Ghaleh; Philippe Le Corvoisier; Josep Alberola Bou; Salvador Esquena Fernández; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-01-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Antonio Benito Porcaro; Giovanni Novella; Giovanni Cacciamani; Davide De Marchi; Paolo Corsi; Nicolò De Luyk; Leonardo Bizzotto; Tania Processali; Mattia Cerasuolo; Irene Tamanini; Maria Angela Cerruto; Matteo Brunelli; Salvatore Siracusano; Walter Artibani Journal: Urol Int Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Jens Hansen; Marco Auprich; Sascha A Ahyai; Alexandre de la Taille; Hendrik van Poppel; Michael Marberger; Arnulf Stenzl; Peter F A Mulders; Hartwig Huland; Margit Fisch; Clement-Claude Abbou; Jack A Schalken; Yves Fradet; Leonard S Marks; William Ellis; Alan W Partin; Karl Pummer; Markus Graefen; Alexander Haese; Jochen Walz; Alberto Briganti; Shahrokh F Shariat; Felix K Chun Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-07-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Amin Ali; Alexander Du Feu; Pedro Oliveira; Ananya Choudhury; Robert G Bristow; Esther Baena Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2021-10-19 Impact factor: 14.432