Head-to-head comparison of two online nomograms for prostate biopsy outcome prediction

BJU International

Volumn 107, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1780-1783

  Oliveira, Mário ^a   Marques, Vera ^a   Carvalho, António Pedro ^a   Santos, Américo ^a  

^a HOSPITAL DE BRAGA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

biopsy; nomogram; prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; EUROPE; EUROPEAN RANDOMIZED STUDY OF SCREENING FOR PROSTATE CANCER DERIVED PROSTATE RISK INDICATOR; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INSTRUMENT VALIDATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NOMOGRAM; NORTH AMERICA; ONLINE ANALYSIS; ORGAN SIZE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE CANCER PREVENTION TRIAL CANCER RISK CALCULATOR; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; COHORT STUDIES; HUMANS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NOMOGRAMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 79956368759     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09727.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Kranse R, Roobol M, Schroder FH,. A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis. Prostate 2008; 68: 1674-80
2. 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: 529-34 (Pubitemid 43898816)
3. 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: 1930-4 (Pubitemid 40675214)
4. 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 < or = 10 ng/mL. Cancer 2003; 98: 1417-22 (Pubitemid 37151496)
5. 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: 709-13 (Pubitemid 29449435)
6. 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: 274-90
7. Roobol MJ,. The use of nomograms in the detection of prostate cancer. Prostate 2006; 66: 1266-7 (Pubitemid 44384302)
8. Roobol MJ, Schroder FH, Kranse R,. A comparison of first and repeat (four years later) prostate cancer screening in a randomized cohort of a symptomatic men aged 55-75 years using a biopsy indication of 3.0 ng/ml (results of ERSPC, Rotterdam). Prostate 2006; 66: 604-12
9. Utsumi T, Kawamura K, Suzuki H, et al,. External validation and head-to-head comparison of Japanese and Western prostate biopsy nomograms using Japanese data sets. Int J Urol 2009; 16: 416-9
10. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, et al,. Development and external validation of an extended repeat biopsy nomogram. J Urol 2007; 177: 510-5 (Pubitemid 46054043)
11. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL,. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837-45
12. Chun FK, Karakiewicz PI, Briganti A, et al,. Prostate cancer nomograms: an update. Eur Urol 2006; 50: 914-26; discussion 926 (Pubitemid 44486495)
13. Roobol MJ, Kranse R, Schröder FH,. Prostate volume adjustment with rectal examination (DRE) within the ERSPC risk calculator. J Urol 2010; 183: e714 (AUA Meeting Abstracts Supplement)
14. van den Bergh RC, Roobol MJ, Wolters T, van Leeuwen PJ, Schroder FH,. The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators indicating a positive prostate biopsy: a comparison. BJU Int 2008; 102: 1068-73
15. 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: 601-11
16. Kirby RS, Fitzpatrick JM, Irani J,. Prostate cancer diagnosis in the new millennium: strengths and weaknesses of prostate-specific antigen and the discovery and clinical evaluation of prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3). BJU Int 2009; 103: 441-5
17. Fall K, Garmo H, Andren O, et al,. Prostate-specific antigen levels as a predictor of lethal prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007; 99: 526-32 (Pubitemid 47073555)
18. Zappa M, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Mazzotta A,. Overdiagnosis of prostate carcinoma by screening: an estimate based on the results of the Florence Screening Pilot Study. Ann Oncol 1998; 9: 1297-300 (Pubitemid 29045568)
19. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al,. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/ml or lower. JAMA 2005; 294: 66-70 (Pubitemid 41002840)
20. Kirby RS, Eeles RA, Kote-Jarai Z, Guy M, Easton D, Fitzpatrick JM,. Screening for prostate cancer: the way ahead. BJU Int 2010; 105: 295-7
21. Haese A, de la Taille A, van Poppel H, et al,. Clinical utility of the PCA3 urine assay in European men scheduled for repeat biopsy. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 1081-8