Literature DB >> 31758738

External validation of novel magnetic resonance imaging-based models for prostate cancer prediction.

Lukas Püllen1, Jan P Radtke1,2, Manuel Wiesenfarth3, Monique J Roobol4, Jan F M Verbeek4, Axel Wetter5, Nika Guberina5, Abhishek Pandey6, Clemens Hüttenbrink6, Stephan Tschirdewahn1, Sascha Pahernik6, Boris A Hadaschik1, Florian A Distler6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To validate, in an external cohort, three novel risk models, including the recently updated European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator, that combine multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and clinical variables to predict clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 307 men who underwent mpMRI prior to transperineal ultrasound fusion biopsy between October 2015 and July 2018 at two German centres. mpMRI was rated by Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2.0 and clinically significant PCa was defined as International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason grade group ≥2. The prediction performance of the three models (MRI-ERSPC-3/4, and two risk models published by Radtke et al. and Distler et al., ModRad and ModDis) were compared using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses, with area under the ROC curve (AUC), calibration curve analyses and decision curves used to assess net benefit.
RESULTS: The AUCs of the three novel models (MRI-ERSPC-3/4, ModRad and ModDis) were 0.82, 0.85 and 0.83, respectively. Calibration curve analyses showed the best intercept for MRI-ERSPC-3 and -4 of 0.35 and 0.76. Net benefit analyses indicated clear benefit of the MRI-ERSPC-3/4 risk models compared with the other two validated models. The MRI-ERSPC-3/4 risk models demonstrated a discrimination benefit for a risk threshold of up to 15% for clinically significant PCa as compared to the other risk models.
CONCLUSION: In our external validation of three novel prostate cancer risk models, which incorporate mpMRI findings, a head-to-head comparison indicated that the MRI-ERSPC-3/4 risk model in particular could help to reduce unnecessary biopsies.
© 2019 The Authors BJU International © 2019 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM ; #ProstateCancer; European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer; biopsy; diagnostic imaging; magnetic resonance imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31758738     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14958

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  8 in total

1.  External validation of the Rotterdam prostate cancer risk calculator within a high-risk Dutch clinical cohort.

Authors:  Marinus J Hagens; Piter J Stelwagen; Hans Veerman; Sybren P Rynja; Martijn Smeenge; Vincent van der Noort; Ton A Roeleveld; Jolien van Kesteren; Sebastiaan Remmers; Monique J Roobol; Pim J van Leeuwen; Henk G van der Poel
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-10-16       Impact factor: 3.661

2.  A prostate cancer risk calculator: Use of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging data to predict biopsy outcome in North American men.

Authors:  Adam Kinnaird; Wayne Brisbane; Lorna Kwan; Alan Priester; Ryan Chuang; Danielle E Barsa; Merdie Delfin; Anthony Sisk; Daniel Margolis; Ely Felker; Jim Hu; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 2.052

3.  Integration of magnetic resonance imaging into prostate cancer nomograms.

Authors:  Garrett J Brinkley; Andrew M Fang; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2022-05-13

4.  Reducing Biopsies and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scans During the Diagnostic Pathway of Prostate Cancer: Applying the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator to the PRECISION Trial Data.

Authors:  Sebastiaan Remmers; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Jan F M Verbeek; Caroline M Moore; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-12-15

5.  Clash of the calculators: External validation of prostate cancer risk calculators in men undergoing mpMRI and transperineal biopsy.

Authors:  G Wei; B D Kelly; B Timm; M Perera; D J Lundon; G Jack; D M Bolton
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-03-03

Review 6.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Predictive Models for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Marina Triquell; Miriam Campistol; Ana Celma; Lucas Regis; Mercè Cuadras; Jacques Planas; Enrique Trilla; Juan Morote
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 6.575

7.  External validation of two mpMRI-risk calculators predicting risk of prostate cancer before biopsy.

Authors:  Maximilian Pallauf; Fabian Steinkohl; Georg Zimmermann; Maximilian Horetzky; Pawel Rajwa; Benjamin Pradere; Andrea Katharina Lindner; Renate Pichler; Thomas Kunit; Shahrokh F Shariat; Lukas Lusuardi; Martin Drerup
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 3.661

8.  A Predictive Model Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Parameters for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population.

Authors:  Tae Il Noh; Chang Wan Hyun; Ha Eun Kang; Hyun Jung Jin; Jong Hyun Tae; Ji Sung Shim; Sung Gu Kang; Deuk Jae Sung; Jun Cheon; Jeong Gu Lee; Seok Ho Kang
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 4.679

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.