A novel repeat biopsy nomogram based on three-dimensional extended biopsy

Urology

Volumn 77, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 915-920

  Sakura, Mizuaki ^a   Kawakami, Satoru ^a   Ishioka, Junichiro ^a   Fujii, Yasuhisa ^a   Yamamoto, Shinya ^a   Iwai, Aki ^a   Numao, Noboru ^a   Saito, Kazutaka ^a   Koga, Fumitaka ^a   Masuda, Hitoshi ^a   Kumagai, Jiro ^a   Yonese, Junji ^a   Fukui, Iwao ^a   Kihara, Kazunori ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COHORT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOMOGRAM; ORGAN SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 79953873700     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.08.035     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. O'Dowd GJ, Miller MC, Orozco R, et al. Analysis of repeated biopsy results within 1 year after a noncancer diagnosis. Urology. 2000;55:553-559.
2. Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Scardino PT, et al. A nomogram for predicting a positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy session. J Urol. 2003;170:1184-1188. (Pubitemid 37108108)
3. Garzotto M, Park Y, Mongoue-Tchokote S, et al. Recursive partitioning for risk stratification in men undergoing repeat prostate biopsies. Cancer. 2005;104:1911-1917. (Pubitemid 41513174)
4. 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. (Pubitemid 44189057)
5. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, et al. Development and external validation of an extended repeat biopsy nomogram. J Urol. 2007;177:510-515. (Pubitemid 46054043)
6. Benecchi L, Pieri AM, Melissari M, et al. A novel nomogram to predict the probability of prostate cancer on repeat biopsy. J Urol. 2008;180:146-149.
7. Rochester MA, Pashayan N, Matthews F, et al. Development and validation of risk score for predicting positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy in a UK population. BMC Urol. 2009;9:7.
8. Kawakami S, Okuno T, Yonese J, et al. Optimal sampling sites for repeat prostate biopsy: A recursive partitioning analysis of three-dimensional 26-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol. 2007;51:675-683. (Pubitemid 46097259)
9. Nam RK, Toi A, Klotz LH, et al. Assessing individual risk for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3582-3588. (Pubitemid 47372595)
10. 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.
11. Kawakami S, Hyochi N, Yonese J, et al. Three-dimensional combination of transrectal and transperineal biopsies for efficient detection of stage T1(c) prostate cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2006;11:127-132.
12. Kawakami S, Koga F, Matsuoka Y, et al. 22-core systematic biopsy (transperineal-14 plus transrectal-8 cores) remarkably improves prostate cancer detection over conventional sextant biopsy. J Urol Suppl. 2003;169:435.
13. Numao N, Kawakami S, Yokoyama M, et al. Improved accuracy in predicting the presence of Gleason pattern 4-5 prostate cancer by three-dimensional 26-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol. 2007;52:1663-1669. (Pubitemid 350052387)
14. Giannarini G, Autorino R, Lorenzo G. Saturation biopsy of the prostate: why saturation does not saturate. Eur Urol. 2009;56:619-621.
15. Kawakami S, Takeshita M, Tatokoro M, et al. Diagnostic performance of a three-dimensional 14-core systematic biopsy which can detect more than. 95 % of the prostate cancers detected by the three-dimensional 26-core super-extended biopsy scheme. Eur Urol Suppl. 2010;9:66.
16. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2008;53:68-80. (Pubitemid 350166735)
17. Kubo Y, Kawakami S, Numao N, et al. Simple and effective local anesthesia for transperineal extended prostate biopsy: application to three-dimensional 26-core biopsy. Int J Urol. 2009;16:420-423.
18. Arlen PM, Bianco F, Dahut WL, et al, prostate specific antigen working Group. Prostate Specific Antigen Working Group guidelines on prostate specific antigen doubling time. J Urol. 2008;179:2181-2185.
19. Ramirez ML, Nelson EC, White RWV, et al. Current applications for prostate-specific antigen doubling time. Eur Urol. 2008;54:291-302.
20. Loeb S, Kettermann A, Ferrucci L, et al. Doubling time versus PSA velocity to predict high-risk prostate cancer: data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. Eur Urol. 2008;54:1073-1080.
21. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Mak. 2006;26:565-574. (Pubitemid 44728772)
22. Vickers AJ. Decision analysis for the evaluation of diagnostic tests, prediction models and molecular markers. Am Stat. 2008;62:314-320.
23. Yanke BV, Gonen M, Scardino PT, et al. Validation of a nomogram for predicting positive repeat biopsy for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005;173:421-424.
24. Kawakami S, Yamamoto S, Numao N, et al. Direct comparison between transrectal and transperineal extended prostate biopsy for the detection of cancer. Int J Urol. 2007;14:719-724. (Pubitemid 47206771)
25. Delongchamps NB, Haas GP. Saturation biopsies for prostate cancer: current uses and future prospects. Nat. Rev Urol. 2009;6:645-652.
26. Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, et al. Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol. 2001;166:1679-1683.
27. Moore CK, Karikehalli S, Nazeer T, et al. Prognostic significance of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation in the contemporary era. J Urol. 2005;173:70-72. (Pubitemid 39627675)