Comparison of Two Different Artificial Neural Networks for Prostate Biopsy Indication in Two Different Patient Populations

Urology

Volumn 70, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 596-601

  Stephan, Carsten ^a   Xu, Chuanliang ^a,b   Finne, Patrik ^c,d   Cammann, Henning ^a   Meyer, Hellmuth Alexander ^a   Lein, Michael ^a   Jung, Klaus ^a   Stenman, Ulf Hakan ^c  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^b SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c HELSINKI UNIVERSITY CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Finland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TAMPERE   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; IMMULITE BASED ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PERCEPTRON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; SCREENING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT INDICATION;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AREA UNDER CURVE; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; COHORT STUDIES; FINLAND; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MULTICENTER STUDIES; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); PALPATION; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASOUND, HIGH-INTENSITY FOCUSED, TRANSRECTAL;

EID: 34648823693     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Polascik T.J., Oesterling J.E., and Partin A.W. Prostate specific antigen: a decade of discovery-what we have learned and where we are going. J Urol 162 (1999) 293-306
2. Catalona W.J., Southwick P.C., Slawin K.M., et al. Comparison of percent free PSA, PSA density, and age-specific PSA cutoffs for prostate cancer detection and staging. Urology 56 (2000) 255-260
3. Lilja H., Christensson A., Dahlen U., et al. Prostate-specific antigen in serum occurs predominantly in complex with alpha 1-antichymotrypsin. Clin Chem 37 (1991) 1618-1625
4. Stenman U.H., Leinonen J., Alfthan H., et al. A complex between prostate-specific antigen and alpha 1-antichymotrypsin is the major form of prostate-specific antigen in serum of patients with prostatic cancer: assay of the complex improves clinical sensitivity for cancer. Cancer Res 51 (1991) 222-226
5. Catalona W.J., Bartsch G., Rittenhouse H.G., et al. Serum pro prostate specific antigen improves cancer detection compared to free and complexed prostate specific antigen in men with prostate specific antigen 2 to 4 ng/ml. J Urol 170 (2003) 2181-2185
6. Okihara K., Cheli C.D., Partin A.W., et al. Comparative analysis of complexed prostate specific antigen, free prostate specific antigen and their ratio in detecting prostate cancer. J Urol 167 (2002) 2017-2023
7. Stenman U.H., Finne P., Zhang W.M., et al. Prostate-specific antigen and other prostate cancer markers. Urology 56 (2000) 893-898
8. Catalona W.J., Partin A.W., Slawin K.M., et al. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. JAMA 279 (1998) 1542-1547
9. Lee C.T., and Scardino P.T. Percent free prostate-specific antigen for first-time prostate biopsy. Urology 57 (2001) 594-598
10. Stephan C., Lein M., Jung K., et al. Can prostate specific antigen derivatives reduce the frequency of unnecessary prostate biopsies?. J Urol 157 (1997) 1371
11. Carlson G.D., Calvanese C.B., and Partin A.W. An algorithm combining age, total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and percent free PSA to predict prostate cancer: results on 4298 cases. Urology 52 (1998) 455-461
12. Virtanen A., Gomari M., Kranse R., et al. Estimation of prostate cancer probability by logistic regression: free and total prostate-specific antigen, digital rectal examination, and heredity are significant variables. Clin Chem 45 (1999) 987-994
13. Babaian R.J., Fritsche H., Ayala A., et al. Performance of a neural network in detecting prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen reflex range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL. Urology 56 (2000) 1000-1006
14. Djavan B., Remzi M., Zlotta A., et al. Novel artificial neural network for early detection of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 20 (2002) 921-929
15. 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
16. Stephan C., Jung K., Cammann H., et al. An artificial neural network considerably improves the diagnostic power of percent free prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer diagnosis: results of a 5-year investigation. Int J Cancer 99 (2002) 466-473
17. Garzotto M., Hudson R.G., Peters L., et al. Predictive modeling for the presence of prostate carcinoma using clinical, laboratory, and ultrasound parameters in patients with prostate specific antigen levels < or = 10 ng/mL. Cancer 98 (2003) 1417-1422
18. Kalra P., Togami J., Bansal B.S.G., et al. A neurocomputational model for prostate carcinoma detection. Cancer 98 (2003) 1849-1854
19. Semjonow A., De Angelis G., Oberpenning F., et al. The clinical impact of different assays for prostate specific antigen. BJU Int 86 (2000) 590-597
20. Yurdakul G., Bangma C., Blijenberg B., et al. Different PSA assays lead to detection of prostate cancers with identical histological features. Eur Urol 42 (2002) 154-158
21. Roddam A.W., Rimmer J., Nickerson C., et al. Prostate-specific antigen: bias and molarity of commercial assays for PSA in use in England. Ann Clin Biochem 43 (2006) 35-48
22. Stephan C., Klaas M., Muller C., et al. 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
23. Stephan C., and Semjonow A. Accuracy assessment of PSA methods must be based on clinical instead of artificial samples-a response to AW Roddam et al. Ann Clin Biochem 43 (2006) 35-48
24. Stephan C., and Semjonow A. Accuracy assessment of PSA methods must be based on clinical instead of artificial samples-a response to AW Roddam et al. Ann Clin Biochem 43 (2006) 421-422
25. 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
26. Maattanen L., Auvinen A., Stenman U.H., et al. European randomized study of prostate cancer screening: first-year results of the Finnish trial. Br J Cancer 79 (1999) 1210-1214
27. Hanley J.A., and McNeil B.J. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristics curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148 (1983) 839-843
28. Remzi M., Anagnostou T., Ravery V., et al. An artificial neural network to predict the outcome of repeat prostate biopsies. Urology 62 (2003) 456-460
29. Sargent D.J. Comparison of artificial neural networks with other statistical approaches. Cancer 91 (2001) 1636-1642