Techniques and predictive models to improve prostate cancer detection

Cancer

Volumn 115, Issue SUPPL 13, 2009, Pages 3085-3099

  Herman, Michael P ^a   Dorsey, Philip ^a   John, Majnu ^a   Patel, Nishant ^a   Leung, Robert ^a   Tewari, Ashutosh ^a  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial neural network; Detection; Nomogram; Predictive modeling; Prostate cancer; Screening

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CONFERENCE PAPER; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOMOGRAM; PATIENT COUNSELING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCREENING TEST; STATISTICAL MODEL; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

BAYES THEOREM; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); NOMOGRAMS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 67649923170     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24357     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (115)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures, 2008. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society; 2008.
2. [No authors listed] Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) best practice policy. American Urological Association (AUA). Oncology (Williston Park). 2000;14:267-272, 277-278, 280 passim.
3. Loeb S, Catalona WJ. What to do with an abnormal PSA test. Oncologist. 2008;13:299-305.
4. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:185-191.
5. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ratliff TL, et al. Measurement of prostate-specific antigen in serum as a screening test for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1156-1161.
6. Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, et al. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6630 men. J Urol. 1994;151:1283-1290.
7. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:215-224.
8. Thompson IM, Pauler DK, Goodman PJ, et al. Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level ≤4.0 ng per milliliter. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2239-2246.
9. Schwartz MJ, Hwang DH, Hung AJ, et al. Negative influence of changing biopsy practice patterns on the predictive value of prostate-specific antigen for cancer detection on prostate biopsy. Cancer. 2008;112:1718-1725.
10. Stamey TA, Johnstone IM, McNeal JE, Lu AY, Yemoto CM. Preoperative serum prostate specific antigen levels between 2 and 22 ng/mL correlate poorly with post-radical prostatectomy cancer morphology: prostate specific antigen cure rates appear constant between 2 and 9 ng/mL. J Urol. 2002;167:103-111.
11. Stamey TA, Caldwell M, McNeal JE, Nolley R, Hemenez M, Downs J. The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years? J Urol. 2004;172(4 pt 1):1297-1301.
12. Benson MC, Whang IS, Pantuck A, et al. Prostate specific antigen density: a means of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer. J Urol. 1992;147(3 pt 2):815-816.
13. Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG, et al. Analysis of gland volume effect on the performance of PSA density in early detection of nonpalpable, isoechoic prostate cancer. Can J Urol. 1996;3:212-220.
14. Catalona WJ, Southwick PC, Slawin KM, et al. Comparison of percent free PSA, PSA density, and age-specific PSA cutoffs for prostate cancer detection and staging. Urology. 2000;56:255-260.
15. Djavan B, Zlotta AR, Remzi M, et al. Total and transition zone prostate volume and age: how do they affect the utility of PSA-based diagnostic parameters for early prostate cancer detection? Urology. 1999;54:846-852.
16. Connolly D, Black A, Murray LJ, Napolitano G, Gavin A, Keane PF. Methods of calculating prostate-specific antigen velocity. Eur Urol. 2007;52:1044-1050.
17. Fang J, Metter EJ, Landis P, Carter HB. PSA velocity for assessing prostate cancer risk in men with PSA levels between 2.0 and 4.0 ng/mL. Urology. 2002;59:889-893; discussion 893-894.
18. Schroder FH, Roobol MJ, van der Kwast TH, Kranse R, Bangma CH. Does PSA velocity predict prostate cancer in pre-screened populations? Eur Urol. 2006;49:460-465; discussion 465.
19. Eastham JA, Riedel E, Scardino PT, et al. Variation of serum prostate-specific antigen levels: an evaluation of year-to-year fluctuations. JAMA. 2003;289:2695-2700.
20. Schroder FH, Carter HB, Wolters T, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer in 2007. Part 1: PSA and PSA kinetics. Eur Urol. 2008;53:468-477.
21. Stenman UH, Leinonen J, Alfthan H, Rannikko S, Tuhkanen K, Alfthan O. 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. 1991;51:222-226.
22. Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Slawin KM, 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. 1998;279:1542-1547.
23. Chun FK, Hutterer GC, Perrotte P, et al. Distribution of prostate specific antigen (PSA) and percentage free PSA in a contemporary screening cohort with no evidence of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2007;100:37-41.
24. Takayama TK, Fujikawa K, Davie EW. Characterization of the precursor of prostate-specific antigen. Activation by trypsin and by human glandular kallikrein. J Biol Chem. 1997;272:21582-21588.
25. Mikolajczyk SD, Grauer LS, Millar LS, et al. A precursor form of PSA (pPSA) is a component of the free PSA in prostate cancer serum. Urology. 1997;50:710-714.
26. Mikolajczyk SD, Millar LS, Wang TJ, et al. A precursor form of prostate-specific antigen is more highly elevated in prostate cancer compared with benign transition zone prostate tissue. Cancer Res. 2000;60:756-759.
27. Chan TY, Mikolajczyk SD, Lecksell K, et al. Immunohistochemical staining of prostate cancer with monoclonal antibodies to the precursor of prostate-specific antigen. Urology. 2003;62:177-181.
28. Sokoll LJ, Chan DW, Mikolajczyk SD, et al. Proenzyme PSA for the early detection of prostate cancer in the 2.5-4.0 ng/mL total PSA range: preliminary analysis. Urology. 2003;61:274-276.
29. Catalona WJ, Bartsch G, Rittenhouse HG, et al. Serum pro-prostate specific antigen preferentially detects aggressive prostate cancers in men with 2 to 4 ng/mL prostate specific antigen. J Urol. 2004;171(6 pt 1):2239-2244.
30. Lein M, Semjonow A, Graefen M, et al. A multicenter clinical trial on the use of (-5, -7) pro prostate specific antigen. J Urol. 2005;174:2150-2153.
31. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW. Nomograms for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2006;98:39-46.
32. Ross PL, Gerigk C, Gonen M, et al. Comparisons of nomograms and urologists' predictions in prostate cancer. Semin Urol Oncol. 2002;20:82-88.
33. Specht MC, Kattan MW, Gonen M, Fey J, Van Zee KJ. Predicting nonsentinel node status after positive sentinel lymph biopsy for breast cancer: clinicians versus nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:654-659.
34. Gunnarsson PS, Sawyer WT, Montague D, Williams ML, Dupuis RE, Caiola SM. Appropriate use of heparin. Empiric vs nomogram-based dosing. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:526-532.
35. Dawson NV. Physician judgment in clinical settings: methodological influences and cognitive performance. Clin Chem. 1993;39:1468-1478; discussion 1478-1480.
36. Beam CA, Gao W, Macias V, Liang W, Balla A. Sequential testing approach as an efficient and easier alternative for the validation of new predictive technologies in the clinic. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1087-1090.
37. Kranse R, Roobol M, Schroder FH. A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis. Prostate. 2008;68:1674-1680.
38. European Association of Urology. Prostate Risk Indicator, 2007. Available at: http://www.prostate-riskindicator.com/via.html Accessed March 1, 2009.
39. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al. Cancer Risk Calculator for Prostate Cancer (Based on the PCPT). Available at: http://deb.uthscsa.edu/ URORiskCalc/Pages/calcs.jsp Accessed March 1, 2009.
40. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996;15:361-387.
41. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Margulis V, Kattan MW. Inventory of prostate cancer predictive tools. Curr Opin Urol. 2008;18:279-296.
42. Yanke BV, Gonen M, Scardino PT, Kattan MW. Validation of a nomogram for predicting positive repeat biopsy for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005;173:421-424.
43. Yanke BV, Carver BS, Bianco FJ Jr, et al. African-American race is a predictor of prostate cancer detection: incorporation into a pre-biopsy nomogram. BJU Int. 2006;98:783-787.
44. Walz J, Graefen M, Chun FK, et al. High incidence of prostate cancer detected by saturation biopsy after previous negative biopsy series. Eur Urol. 2006;50:498-505.
45. Suzuki H, Komiya A, Kamiya N, et al. Development of a nomogram to predict probability of positive initial prostate biopsy among Japanese patients. Urology. 2006;67:131-136.
46. O'Dowd GJ, Miller MC, Orozco R, Veltri RW. Analysis of repeated biopsy results within 1 year after a noncancer diagnosis. Urology. 2000;55:553-559.
47. Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Scardino PT, Reuter VE, Gonen M, Kattan MW. A nomogram for predicting a positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy session. J Urol. 2003;170(4 pt 1):1184-1188; discussion 1188.
48. Karakiewicz PI, Benayoun S, Kattan MW, et al. Development and validation of a nomogram predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy based on patient age, digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen. J Urol. 2005;173:1930-1934.
49. Garzotto M, Hudson RG, 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 ≤10 ng/mL. Cancer. 2003;98:1417-1422.
50. Eastham JA, May R, Robertson JL, Sartor O, Kattan MW. Development of a nomogram that predicts the probability of a positive prostate biopsy in men with an abnormal digital rectal examination and a prostate-specific antigen between 0 and 4 ng/mL. Urology. 1999;54:709-713.
51. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, et al. Development and external validation of an extended 10-core biopsy nomogram. Eur Urol. 2007;52:436-444.
52. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, et al. Development and external validation of an extended repeat biopsy nomogram. J Urol. 2007;177:510-515.
53. Benecchi L, Pieri AM, Melissari M, Potenzoni M, Pastizzaro CD. A novel nomogram to predict the probability of prostate cancer on repeat biopsy. J Urol. 2008;180:146-149.
54. Finne P, Auvinen A, Aro J, et al. Estimation of prostate cancer risk on the basis of total and free prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume and digital rectal examination. Eur Urol. 2002;41:619-626; discussion 626-627.
55. Kawakami S, Koga F, Fujii Y, et al. History of malignancy is a predictor of prostate cancer detection: incorporation into a pre-biopsy nomogram. Int J Urol. 2008;15:1055-1060.
56. Kawakami S, Numao N, Okubo Y, et al. Development, validation, and head-to-head comparison of logistic regression-based nomograms and artificial neural network models predicting prostate cancer on initial extended biopsy. Eur Urol. 2008;54:601-611.
57. Nam RK, Toi A, Klotz LH, et al. Assessing individual risk for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3582-3588.
58. Guzzo TJ, Kutikov A, Canter DJ, et al. The clinical and pathological history of prostate cancer progression in men with a prior history of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Can J Urol. 2008;15:4174-4179.
59. Akhavan A, Keith JD, Bastacky SI, Cai C, Wang Y, Nelson JB. The proportion of cores with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on extended-pattern needle biopsy is significantly associated with prostate cancer on site-directed repeat biopsy. BJU Int. 2007;99:765-769.
60. Girasole CR, Cookson MS, Putzi MJ, et al. Significance of atypical and suspicious small acinar proliferations, and high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on prostate biopsy: implications for cancer detection and biopsy strategy. J Urol. 2006;175(3 pt 1):929-933; discussion 933.
61. Miyake H, Kurahashi T, Takenaka A, Hara I, Fujisawa M. Improved accuracy for predicting the Gleason score of prostate cancer by increasing the number of transrectal biopsy cores. Urol Int. 2007;79:302-306.
62. Babaian RJ, 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. 2000;56:1000-1006.
63. Babaian RJ, Fritsche HA, Zhang Z, Zhang KH, Madyastha KR, Barnhill SD. Evaluation of prostAsure index in the detection of prostate cancer: a preliminary report. Urology. 1998;51:132-136.
64. Djavan B, Remzi M, Zlotta A, Seitz C, Snow P, Marberger M. Novel artificial neural network for early detection of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:921-929.
65. Finne P, Finne R, Auvinen A, et al. Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy in screen-positive men by a multilayer perceptron network. Urology. 2000;56:418-422.
66. Finne P, Finne R, Bangma C, et al. Algorithms based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, digital rectal examination and prostate volume reduce false-positive PSA results in prostate cancer screening. Int J Cancer. 2004;111:310-315.
67. Horninger W, Bartsch G, Snow PB, Brandt JM, Partin AW. The problem of cutoff levels in a screened population: appropriateness of informing screenees about their risk of having prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 2001;91(8 suppl):1667-1672.
68. Lee HJ, Kim KG, Lee SE, et al. Role of transrectal ultrasonography in the prediction of prostate cancer: artificial neural network analysis. J Ultrasound Med. 2006;25:815-821; quiz 822-824.
69. Matsui Y, Utsunomiya N, Ichioka K, et al. The use of artificial neural network analysis to improve the predictive accuracy of prostate biopsy in the Japanese population. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2004;34:602-607.
70. Porter CR, Gamito EJ, Crawford ED, et al. Model to predict prostate biopsy outcome in large screening population with independent validation in referral setting. Urology. 2005;65:937-941.
71. Porter CR, O'Donnell C, Crawford ED, et al. Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy in a racially diverse population: a prospective study. Urology. 2002;60:831-835.
72. Remzi M, Anagnostou T, Ravery V, et al. An artificial neural network to predict the outcome of repeat prostate biopsies. Urology. 2003;62:456-460.
73. Snow PB, Smith DS, Catalona WJ. Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer: a pilot study. J Urol. 1994;152(5 pt 2):1923-1926.
74. Stephan C, Buker N, Cammann H, Meyer HA, Lein M, Jung K. Artificial neural network (ANN) velocity better identifies benign prostatic hyperplasia but not prostate cancer compared with PSA velocity [serial online]. BMC Urol. 2008;8:10.
75. Stephan C, Cammann H, Semjonow A, et al. Multicenter evaluation of an artificial neural network to increase the prostate cancer detection rate and reduce unnecessary biopsies. Clin Chem. 2002;48:1279-1287.
76. Stephan C, Jung K, Soosaipillai A, et al. Clinical utility of human glandular kallikrein 2 within a neural network for prostate cancer detection. BJU Int. 2005;96:521-527.
77. Stephan C, Meyer HA, Cammann H, Nakamura T, Diamandis EP, Jung K. Improved prostate cancer detection with a human kallikrein 11 and percentage free PSA-based artificial neural network. Biol Chem. 2006;387:801-805.
78. Stephan C, Meyer HA, Kwiatkowski M, et al. A (-5, -7) proPSA based artificial neural network to detect prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2006;50:1014-1020.
79. 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. 2007;25:95-103.
80. Stephan C, Xu C, Finne P, et al. Comparison of 2 different artificial neural networks for prostate biopsy indication in 2 different patient populations. Urology. 2007;70:596-601.
81. Virtanen A, Gomari M, Kranse R, Stenman UH. Estimation of prostate cancer probability by logistic regression: free and total prostate-specific antigen, digital rectal examination, and heredity are significant variables. Clin Chem. 1999;45:987-994.
82. Stephan C, Kahrs AM, Cammann H, et al. A [-2]proPSA-based artificial neural network significantly improves differentiation between prostate cancer and benign prostatic diseases. Prostate. 2009;69:198-207.
83. Stephan C, Xu C, Brown DA, et al. Three new serum markers for prostate cancer detection within a percent free PSA-based artificial neural network. Prostate. 2006;66:651-659.
84. Stephan C, Cammann H, Meyer HA, et al. An artificial neural network for 5 different assay systems of prostate-specific antigen in prostate cancer diagnostics. BJU Int. 2008;102:799-805.
85. Optenberg SA, Clark JY, Brawer MK, Thompson IM, Stein CR, Friedrichs P. Development of a decision-making tool to predict risk of prostate cancer: the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Index (CAPRI) test. Urology. 1997;50:665-672.
86. Kalra P, Togami J, Bansal BSG, et al. A neurocomputational model for prostate carcinoma detection. Cancer. 2003;98:1849-1854.
87. Benecchi L. Neuro-fuzzy system for prostate cancer diagnosis. Urology. 2006;68:357-361.
88. Tewari A, Porter C, Peabody J, et al. Predictive modeling techniques in prostate cancer. Mol Urol. 2001;5:147-152.
89. Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, et al. Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA. 1997;277:1445-1451.
90. Carlson GD, Calvanese CB, Partin AW. An algorithm combining age, total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and percent free PSA to predict prostate cancer: results on 4298 cases. Urology. 1998;52:455-461.
91. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Suardi N, Kattan MW. Comparison of nomograms with other methods for predicting outcomes in prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:4400-4407.
92. Mitchell JA, Cooperberg MR, Elkin EP, et al. Ability of 2 pretreatment risk assessment methods to predict prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy: data from CaPSURE. J Urol. 2005;173:1126-1131.
93. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al. Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:529-534.
94. Parekh DJ, Ankerst DP, Higgins BA, et al. External validation of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in a screened population. Urology. 2006;68:1152-1155.
95. Hernandez DJ, Han M, Humphreys EB, et al. Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy: comparison of a novel logistic regression-based model, the prostate cancer risk calculator, and prostate-specific antigen level alone. BJU Int. 2008;103:609-614.
96. Ankerst DP, Groskopf J, Day JR, et al. Predicting prostate cancer risk through incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3. J Urol. 2008;180:1303-1308; discussion 1308.
97. Zhou H, Lawson AB, Hebert JR, Slate EH, Hill EG. A Bayesian hierarchical modeling approach for studying the factors affecting the stage at diagnosis of prostate cancer. Stat Med. 2008;27:1468-1489.
98. Wang W, Chen S, Brune KA, Hruban RH, Parmigiani G, Klein AP. PancPRO: risk assessment for individuals with a family history of pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1417-1422.
99. Abdel-Aal RE. GMDH-based feature ranking and selection for improved classification of medical data. J Biomed Inform. 2005;38:456-468.
100. Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Stout NK, Ortendahl J, Kuntz KM, Goldie SJ, Salomon JA. Modeling human papillomavirus and cervical cancer in the United States for analyses of screening and vaccination [serial online]. Popul Health Metr. 2007;5:11.
101. Lin K, Lipsitz R, Miller T, Janakiraman S. Benefits and harms of prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: an evidence update for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:192-199.
102. Collin SM, Martin RM, Metcalfe C, et al. Prostate-cancer mortality in the USA and UK in 1975-2004: an ecological study. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:445-452.
103. Roobol MJ, Schroder FH. European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer: achievements and presentation. BJU Int. 2003;92(suppl 2):117-122.
104. Andriole GL, Levin DL, Crawford ED, et al. Prostate Cancer Screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial: findings from the initial screening round of a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:433-438.
105. Kattan MW. When and how to use informatics tools in caring for urologic patients. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2005;2: 183-190.
106. Leman ES, Cannon GW, Trock BJ, et al. EPCA-2: a highly specific serum marker for prostate cancer. Urology. 2007;69:714-720.
107. Deras IL, Aubin SM, Blase A, et al. PCA3: a molecular urine assay for predicting prostate biopsy outcome. J Urol. 2008;179:1587-1592.
108. Gu Z, Thomas G, Yamashiro J, et al. Prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) expression increases with high Gleason score, advanced stage and bone metastasis in prostate cancer. Oncogene. 2000;19:1288-1296.
109. Parekh DJ, Ankerst DP, Troyer D, Srivastava S, Thompson IM. Biomarkers for prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 2007;178:2252-2259.
110. Marks LS, Fradet Y, Deras IL, et al. PCA3 molecular urine assay for prostate cancer in men undergoing repeat biopsy. Urology. 2007;69:532-535.
111. Carter HB, Kettermann A, Warlick C, et al. Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol. 2007;178:2359-2364; discussion 2364-2365.
112. Carter HB, Walsh PC, Landis P, Epstein JI. Expectant management of nonpalpable prostate cancer with curative intent: preliminary results. J Urol. 2002;167:1231-1234.
113. Dall'Era MA, Konety BR, Cowan JE, et al. Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort. Cancer. 2008;112:2664-2670.
114. Chun FK, 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. 2007;51:1236-1240; discussion 1241-1243.
115. Schroder F, Kattan MW. The comparability of models for predicting the risk of a positive prostate biopsy with prostate-specific antigen alone: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2008;54:274-290.