Re: Felix K.-H. Chun, Markus Graefen, Alberto Briganti, Andrea Gallina, Julia Hopp, Michael W. Kattan, Hartwig Huland and Pierre I. Karakiewicz. Initial Biopsy Outcome Prediction-Head-to-Head Comparison of a Logistic Regression-Based Nomogram versus Artificial Neural Network. Eur Urol 2007;51:1236-43

European Urology

Volumn 51, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 1446-1447

  Stephan, Carsten ^a   Meyer, Hellmuth A ^a   Cammann, Henning ^a   Lein, Michael ^a   Loening, Stefan A ^a   Jung, Klaus ^a  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ACCURACY; AGE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; CANCER SIZE; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; EXTERNAL VALIDITY; HUMAN; IMMUNOASSAY; LETTER; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; NOMOGRAM; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); NOMOGRAMS; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33947256481     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.11.035     Document Type: Letter

References (9)

1. Chun F.K., Graefen M., Briganti A., et al. Initial biopsy outcome prediction-head-to-head comparison of a logistic regression-based nomogram versus artificial neural network. Eur Urol 51 (2007) 1236-1243
2. Stephan C., Cammann H., Semjonow A., et al. Multicenter evaluation of an artificial neural network to increase prostate cancer detection rate and reduce unnecessary biopsies. Clin Chem 48 (2002) 1279-1287
3. Blijenberg B.G., Yurdakul G., Van Zelst B.D., Bangma C.H., Wildhagen M.F., and Schroder F.H. Discordant performance of assays for free and total prostate-specific antigen in relation to the early detection of prostate cancer. BJU Int 88 (2001) 545-550
4. Semjonow A., De Angelis G., Oberpenning F., Schmid H.P., Brandt B., and Hertle L. The clinical impact of different assays for prostate specific antigen. BJU Int 86 (2000) 590-597
5. Roddam A.W., Rimmer J., Nickerson C., and Ward A.M. Prostate-specific antigen: bias and molarity of commercial assays for PSA in use in England. Ann Clin Biochem 43 (2006) 35-48
6. Stephan C., Klaas M., Muller C., Schnorr D., Loening S.A., and Jung K. Interchangeability of measurements of total and free prostate-specific antigen in serum with 5 frequently used assay combinations: an update. Clin Chem 52 (2006) 59-64
7. Stephan C, Xu C, Cammann H, et al. Assay-specific artificial neural networks for 5 different PSA assays and populations with PSA 2-10 ng/ml in 4480 men. World J Urol. In press.
8. Finne P., Finne R., Auvinen A., et al. Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy in screen-positive men by a multilayer perceptron network. Urology 56 (2000) 418-422
9. Stephan C., Cammann H., and Jung K. Viewpoint. Artificial neural networks: has the time come for their use in prostate cancer patients?. Nat Clin Pract Urol 2 (2005) 262-263