Hualin Song1,2,3, Song Jin4, Peng Xiang5, Shuai Hu6,7,8, Jie Jin9,10,11. 1. Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital and Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, 100034, China. 2. National Research Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Beijing, China. 3. Beijing Key Laboratory of Urogenital Diseases (male), Molecular Diagnosis and Treatment Center, Beijing, China. 4. Department of Urology, Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. 5. Department of Urology, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. 6. Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital and Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, 100034, China. h.shuai786@yahoo.com. 7. National Research Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Beijing, China. h.shuai786@yahoo.com. 8. Beijing Key Laboratory of Urogenital Diseases (male), Molecular Diagnosis and Treatment Center, Beijing, China. h.shuai786@yahoo.com. 9. Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital and Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, 100034, China. jinjie@vip.163.com. 10. National Research Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Beijing, China. jinjie@vip.163.com. 11. Beijing Key Laboratory of Urogenital Diseases (male), Molecular Diagnosis and Treatment Center, Beijing, China. jinjie@vip.163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many studies have reported the prognostic significance of the bone scan index (BSI) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC); however, these reports are controversial. This study investigated the BSI in mCRPC and its relationship with prognosis. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched systematically for relevant articles published before September 1, 2019. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to investigate the prognostic value. RESULTS: This study finally identified 9 eligible studies. The results suggested that high baseline BSI predicted poor OS (HR = 1.331, 95% CI: 1.081-1.640) and that elevated ΔBSI also predicted poor OS (HR = 1.220, 95% CI: 1.015-1.467). The subgroup analysis stratified by ethnicity showed that the baseline BSI and ΔBSI predicted poor OS in the Asian population but not in the Caucasian population. We also performed a subgroup analysis based on the different cut-off values of baseline BSI. The subgroup of ≤1 showed a significant association with OS in mCRPC patients. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that high baseline BSI and elevated ΔBSI predicted poor OS in patients with mCRPC. Hence, the BSI can serve as a prognostic indicator for mCRPC patients and may therefore guide clinical treatment in the future.
BACKGROUND: Many studies have reported the prognostic significance of the bone scan index (BSI) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC); however, these reports are controversial. This study investigated the BSI in mCRPC and its relationship with prognosis. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched systematically for relevant articles published before September 1, 2019. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to investigate the prognostic value. RESULTS: This study finally identified 9 eligible studies. The results suggested that high baseline BSI predicted poor OS (HR = 1.331, 95% CI: 1.081-1.640) and that elevated ΔBSI also predicted poor OS (HR = 1.220, 95% CI: 1.015-1.467). The subgroup analysis stratified by ethnicity showed that the baseline BSI and ΔBSI predicted poor OS in the Asian population but not in the Caucasian population. We also performed a subgroup analysis based on the different cut-off values of baseline BSI. The subgroup of ≤1 showed a significant association with OS in mCRPC patients. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that high baseline BSI and elevated ΔBSI predicted poor OS in patients with mCRPC. Hence, the BSI can serve as a prognostic indicator for mCRPC patients and may therefore guide clinical treatment in the future.
Authors: Ali H D Alshehri; Sarah O S Osman; Kevin M Prise; Caoimhghin Campfield; P G Turner; Suneil Frcr PhD Jain; Joe M O'Sullivan; Aidan J Cole Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 3.039