Combining artificial neural networks and transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

ONCOLOGY

Volumn 17, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 1395-1399

  Porter, Christopher R ^a   Crawford, E David ^b  

^a VIRGINIA MASON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BIOPSY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MALE; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE TUMOR; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REVIEW; THEORETICAL MODEL;

BIOPSY; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); PROGNOSIS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 1542673203     PISSN: 08909091     EISSN: 08909091     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (14)

1. Bostwick DG: Prostate needle biopsy: Squeezing information from threads of tissue. Semin Urol Oncol 17:175-176, 1999.
2. Kattan MW: Nomograms. Introduction. Semin Urol Oncol 20:79-81, 2002.
3. Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, et al: Combination of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathologic stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 277:1445-1451, 1997.
4. Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, et al: Comparison of digital rectal exam and serum prostate specific antigen in early diagnosis of prostate cancer: Results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6, 630 men. J Urol 151:1283-1290, 1994.
5. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ratliff TL, et al: Detection of organ-confined prostate cancer is increased through prostate specific antigen based screening. JAMA 270:948-954, 1993.
6. Schwarzer G, Schumacher M: Artificial neural networks for diagnosis and prognosis in prostate cancer. Semin Urol Oncol 20:89-185, 2002.
7. Snow PB, Smith DS, Catalona WJ: Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer: A pilot study. J Urol 52:1923-1926, 1994.
8. Babaian RJ, Fritsche H, Ayala A, et al: Performance of a neural network in detecting prostate cancer in the prostatic specific antigen range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL. Urology 56:1000-1006, 2000.
9. Djavan B, Remzi M, Zlotta A, et al: Novel artificial neural network for early detection of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 20:921-929, 2002.
10. Eastham JA, May R, Robertson JL, et al: Development of a nomogram that predicts the probability of a positive biopsy in men with an abnormal digital rectal exam and a prostate-specific antigen between 0 and 4 ng/ mL. Urology 54:709-713, 1999.
11. Gore JL, Shariat SF, Miles BJ, et al: Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 165:1560-1561, 2001.
12. Porter CR, O'Donnell C, Crawford ED, et al: Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy in a racially diverse population: A prospective study. Urology 60:831-835, 2002.
13. Dawes RM, Faust D, Meehl PE: Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science 243:1668-1674, 1989.
14. Kattan MW: Editorial. Statistical models, artificial neural networks, and the sophism, "lama patient, not a statistic." J Clin Oncol 20:885-887, 2002.