Peter Ström1, Tobias Nordström2, Markus Aly3, Lars Egevad4, Henrik Grönberg1, Martin Eklund5. 1. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: martin.eklund@ki.se.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been shown that the Stockholm-3 model (S3M) outperforms prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening tool for prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To update the S3M, to give a detailed account of the value of each predictor in the S3M, and to evaluate the S3M as a reflex test for men with PSA ≥3ng/ml. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: During 2012-2015, the Stockholm-3 study evaluated the S3M relative to PSA as tests for Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancers among men aged 50-69 yr. The participants (n=59 159) underwent both tests, and biopsy was recommended if at least one was positive. A total of 5073 men had a biopsy because of elevated PSA (≥3ng/ml). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Logistic regression was used to update the S3M: intact PSA was removed, HOXB13 was included, and the model was fitted to data from the Stockholm-3 training and validation cohorts. To compare S3M with PSA, we fixed the sensitivity for detection of high-grade cancer and evaluated the performance as the number of biopsies needed to achieve that sensitivity for each test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The updated S3M slightly improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve compared to previously published results (0.75 vs 0.74). When used as a reflex test for men with PSA ≥3ng/ml, S3M reduced the number of biopsies needed by 34% compared to the use of PSA alone, with equal sensitivity. A limitation is the ethnically homogeneous population. CONCLUSIONS: A major problem with PSA screening-too many unnecessary biopsies-can be mitigated if S3M is used as a reflex test. PATIENT SUMMARY: To find aggressive prostate cancer with the minimum number of negative biopsies and detection of clinically insignificant cancers, we evaluated the use of a personalized diagnostic prediction model as a second test for men with a positive prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. We found that this two-step approach could reduce prostate biopsies by a third compared to using PSA alone.
BACKGROUND: It has been shown that the Stockholm-3 model (S3M) outperforms prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening tool for prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To update the S3M, to give a detailed account of the value of each predictor in the S3M, and to evaluate the S3M as a reflex test for men with PSA ≥3ng/ml. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: During 2012-2015, the Stockholm-3 study evaluated the S3M relative to PSA as tests for Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancers among men aged 50-69 yr. The participants (n=59 159) underwent both tests, and biopsy was recommended if at least one was positive. A total of 5073 men had a biopsy because of elevated PSA (≥3ng/ml). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Logistic regression was used to update the S3M: intact PSA was removed, HOXB13 was included, and the model was fitted to data from the Stockholm-3 training and validation cohorts. To compare S3M with PSA, we fixed the sensitivity for detection of high-grade cancer and evaluated the performance as the number of biopsies needed to achieve that sensitivity for each test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The updated S3M slightly improved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve compared to previously published results (0.75 vs 0.74). When used as a reflex test for men with PSA ≥3ng/ml, S3M reduced the number of biopsies needed by 34% compared to the use of PSA alone, with equal sensitivity. A limitation is the ethnically homogeneous population. CONCLUSIONS: A major problem with PSA screening-too many unnecessary biopsies-can be mitigated if S3M is used as a reflex test. PATIENT SUMMARY: To find aggressive prostate cancer with the minimum number of negative biopsies and detection of clinically insignificant cancers, we evaluated the use of a personalized diagnostic prediction model as a second test for men with a positive prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. We found that this two-step approach could reduce prostate biopsies by a third compared to using PSA alone.
Authors: Andrei P Drabovich; Punit Saraon; Mikalai Drabovich; Theano D Karakosta; Apostolos Dimitromanolakis; M Eric Hyndman; Keith Jarvi; Eleftherios P Diamandis Journal: Mol Cell Proteomics Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 5.911
Authors: Donna P Ankerst; Johanna Straubinger; Katharina Selig; Lourdes Guerrios; Amanda De Hoedt; Javier Hernandez; Michael A Liss; Robin J Leach; Stephen J Freedland; Michael W Kattan; Robert Nam; Alexander Haese; Francesco Montorsi; Stephen A Boorjian; Matthew R Cooperberg; Cedric Poyet; Emily Vertosick; Andrew J Vickers Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-05-16 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Venera Kuci Emruli; Leena Liljedahl; Ulrika Axelsson; Corinna Richter; Lisa Theorin; Anders Bjartell; Hans Lilja; Jenny Donovan; David Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Carl A K Borrebaeck Journal: Proteomics Clin Appl Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Kimmo Kartasalo; Peter Ström; Pekka Ruusuvuori; Hemamali Samaratunga; Brett Delahunt; Toyonori Tsuzuki; Martin Eklund; Lars Egevad Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 4.535
Authors: Fiona M Walter; Matthew J Thompson; Ian Wellwood; Gary A Abel; William Hamilton; Margaret Johnson; Georgios Lyratzopoulos; Michael P Messenger; Richard D Neal; Greg Rubin; Hardeep Singh; Anne Spencer; Stephen Sutton; Peter Vedsted; Jon D Emery Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2019-06-14 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Felipe Couñago; Fernando López-Campos; Ana Aurora Díaz-Gavela; Elena Almagro; Esaú Fenández-Pascual; Iván Henríquez; Rebeca Lozano; Estefanía Linares Espinós; Alfonso Gómez-Iturriaga; Guillermo de Velasco; Luis Miguel Quintana Franco; Ignacio Rodríguez-Melcón; José López-Torrecilla; Daniel E Spratt; Luis Leonardo Guerrero; Juan Ignacio Martínez-Salamanca; Elia Del Cerro Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 6.639