Literature DB >> 9587121

Assessment of outcome prediction models for patients with localized prostate carcinoma managed with radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy.

A V D'Amico1, A Desjardin, A Chung, M H Chen, D Schultz, R Whittington, S B Malkowicz, A Wein, J E Tomaszewski, A A Renshaw, K Loughlin, J P Richie.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A clinical staging system for localized prostate carcinoma that provides reliable information on which management decisions regarding an individual patient can be based is lacking. This study compared the abilities of all published proposed clinical staging systems to predict time to prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate carcinoma.
METHODS: A total of 1441 clinically localized prostate carcinoma patients who were managed with radical prostatectomy at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia (n = 688) or the Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston (n = 288) or with external beam radiation therapy at the Joint Center for Radiation Therapy in Boston (n = 465) were entered into this study. Patients who received adjuvant or neoadjuvant hormonal or radiation therapy were excluded. Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) and Schwartz Bayesian Criterion (SBC) estimates, which are comparative measures, were calculated for each clinical staging system. Pairwise comparisons of the AIC and SBC estimates for the most predictive clinical staging systems were performed using a formal bootstrap technique with 2000 replications.
RESULTS: Both the staging system based on the risk score and the staging system based on the calculated volume of prostate carcinoma and PSA (cVCa-PSA) optimized the prediction of time to posttreatment PSA failure. The cVCa-PSA system, however, provided a more clinically useful stratification of outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Improved clinical staging for patients with localized prostate carcinoma may be possible with parameters obtained during routine evaluation. Validation by other investigators is underway.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9587121

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


  12 in total

1.  Validating multiparametric MRI for diagnosis and monitoring of prostate cancer in patients for active surveillance.

Authors:  Iqbal Sahibzada; Deepak Batura; Giles Hellawell
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  The effect of Rapid Access Prostate Clinics on the outcomes of Gleason 7 prostate cancer: does earlier diagnosis lead to better outcomes?

Authors:  M P Broe; J C Forde; M S Inder; D J Galvin; D W Mulvin; D M Quinlan
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 1.568

3.  Reverse stage shift at a tertiary care center: escalating risk in men undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jonathan L Silberstein; Andrew J Vickers; Nicholas E Power; Samson W Fine; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Vincent P Laudone
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  The role for surgery in high-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Cécilia Lanchon; Shahrokh F Shariat; Morgan Rouprêt
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2015-09-23

5.  The Development of Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate (ICECaP).

Authors:  Christopher Sweeney; Mari Nakabayashi; Meredith Regan; Wanling Xie; Julia Hayes; Nancy Keating; Suhui Li; Tomas Philipson; Marc Buyse; Susan Halabi; Philip Kantoff; A Oliver Sartor; Howard Soule; Brandon Mahal
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 6.  The role of endorectal coil MRI in preoperative staging and decision-making for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy A Masterson; Karim Touijer
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2008-08-27       Impact factor: 2.310

7.  Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT.

Authors:  Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan; J Athene Lane; Malcolm Mason; Chris Metcalfe; Peter Holding; Julia Wade; Sian Noble; Kirsty Garfield; Grace Young; Michael Davis; Tim J Peters; Emma L Turner; Richard M Martin; Jon Oxley; Mary Robinson; John Staffurth; Eleanor Walsh; Jane Blazeby; Richard Bryant; Prasad Bollina; James Catto; Andrew Doble; Alan Doherty; David Gillatt; Vincent Gnanapragasam; Owen Hughes; Roger Kockelbergh; Howard Kynaston; Alan Paul; Edgar Paez; Philip Powell; Stephen Prescott; Derek Rosario; Edward Rowe; David Neal
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.014

8.  Automated analysis of co-localized protein expression in histologic sections of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Thomas A Tennill; Mitchell E Gross; Hermann B Frieboes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Bone Scan Index: a prognostic imaging biomarker for high-risk prostate cancer patients receiving primary hormonal therapy.

Authors:  Reza Kaboteh; Jan-Erik Damber; Peter Gjertsson; Peter Höglund; Milan Lomsky; Mattias Ohlsson; Lars Edenbrandt
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.138

10.  Analysis of regional bone scan index measurements for the survival of patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jonas Kalderstam; May Sadik; Lars Edenbrandt; Mattias Ohlsson
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 1.930

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.