Head to head comparison of three generations of Partin tables to predict final pathological stage in clinically localised prostate cancer

European Journal of Cancer

Volumn 46, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 2235-2241

  Augustin, Herbert ^a   Isbarn, Hendrik ^b,c   Auprich, Marco ^a   Bonstingl, Daniela ^a   Al Ali, Baderedin Mohamad ^a   Mannweiler, Sebastian ^a   Pummer, Karl ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Nomogram; Partin tables; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PARTIN TABLE; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SEMINAL VESICLES;

EID: 77955717082     PISSN: 09598049     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.04.013     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. M.W. Kattan Expert systems in medicine N.J. Smelser, P.B. Baltes, International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences 2001 Pergamon Oxford 5135 5139
2. S.F. Shariat, P.I. Karakiewicz, C.G. Roehrborn, and M.W. Kattan An updated catalog of prostate cancer predictive tools Cancer 113 2008 3075 3099
3. A.W. Partin, J. Yoo, and H.B. Carter The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer J Urol 150 1993 110 114
4. M.W. Kattan, A.M. Stapleton, T.M. Wheeler, and P.T. Scardino Evaluation of a nomogram used to predict the pathologic stage of clinically localized prostate carcinoma Cancer 79 1997 528 537
5. A.W. Partin, M.W. Kattan, and E.N. Subong Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update JAMA 277 1997 1445 1451
6. M.L. Blute, E.J. Bergstralh, and A.W. Partin Validation of Partin tables for predicting pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer J Urol 164 2000 1591 1595
7. M. Graefen, H. Augustin, and P.I. Karakiewicz Can predictive models for prostate cancer patients derived in the United States of America be utilized in European patients? A validation study of the Partin tables Eur Urol 43 2003 6 10
8. A.W. Partin, L.A. Mangold, and D.M. Lamm Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium Urology 58 2001 843 848
9. D.V. Makarov, B.J. Trock, and E.B. Humphreys Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005 Urology 69 2007 1095 1101
10. M.R. Cooperberg, D.P. Lubeck, S.S. Mehta, and P.R. Carroll Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE) J Urol 170 2003 S21 S25
11. P.C. Albertsen, J.A. Hanley, and G.H. Barrows Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon J Natl Cancer Inst 97 2005 1248 1253
12. L.H. Sobin, and C. Wittekind Prostate L.H. Sobin, C. Wittekind, UICC TNM classification of malignant tumors 6th ed. 2002 Wiley New York 184 187
13. J.E. McNeal, E.A. Redwine, F.S. Freiha, and T.A. Stamey Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread Am J Surg Pathol 12 1988 897 906
14. D.J. Gleason, G.T. Mellinger Veterans Administration Cooperative Urological Research Group Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging J Urol 111 1974 58 64
15. P.L. Ross, C. Gerigk, and M. Gonen Comparisons of nomograms and urologists' predictions in prostate cancer Semin Urol Oncol 20 2002 82 88
16. P.I. Karakiewicz, N. Bhojani, and U. Capitanio External validation of the updated Partin tables in a cohort of North American men J Urol 180 2008 898 902
17. J.B. Yu, D.V. Makarov, and R. Sharma Validation of the Partin nomogram for prostate cancer in a national sample J Urol 183 2010 105 111
18. S.A. Boorjian Editorial Comment to External validation of the updated Partin tables in a cohort of North American men J Urol 180 2008 902
19. H. Augustin, T. Eggert, and S. Wenske Comparison of accuracy between the Partin tables of 1997 and 2001 to predict final pathological stage in clinically localized prostate cancer J Urol 171 2004 177 181
20. W.C. Allsbrook Jr., K.A. Mangold, and M.H. Johnson Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists Hum Pathol 32 2001 74 80
21. N. Bhojani, S. Ahyai, and M. Graefen Partin Tables cannot accurately predict the pathological stage at radical prostatectomy Eur J Surg Oncol 35 2009 123 128
22. N. Bhojani, L. Salomon, and U. Capitanio External validation of the updated Partin tables in a cohort of French and Italian men Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 73 2009 347 352
23. M.H. Sokoloff, and C.B. Brendler Indications and contraindications for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy Urol Clin North Am 28 2001 535 543
24. H. Augustin, G.A. Fritz, T. Ehammer, M. Auprich, and K. Pummer Accuracy of 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging for the staging of prostate cancer in comparison to the Partin tables Acta Radiol 50 2009 562 569
25. S.E. Bleeker, H.A. Moll, and E.W. Steyerberg External validation is necessary in prediction research: a clinical example J Clin Epidemiol 56 2003 826 832