Comparison of risk calculators from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer in a contemporary Canadian cohort

BJU International

Volumn 108, Issue 8 B, 2011, Pages

  Trottier, Greg ^a   Roobol, Monique J ^b   Lawrentschuk, Nathan ^a   Boström, Peter J ^a   Fernandes, Kimberly A ^a   Finelli, Antonio ^a   Chadwick, Karen ^a   Evans, Andrew ^a   Van Der Kwast, Theodorus H ^a   Toi, Ants ^a   Zlotta, Alexandre R ^a   Fleshner, Neil E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

biopsy; nomogram; prostate neoplasms; risk; screening

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANADA; CANCER RISK; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; EUROPEAN RANDOMIZED STUDY OF SCREENING FOR PROSTATE CANCER RISK CALCULATOR; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE CANCER PREVENTION TRIAL RISK CALCULATOR; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

AGED; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 80054016806     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10207.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL III, et al,. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1310-9
2. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al,. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1320-8
3. Brawley OW, Gansler T,. Introducing the 2010 American Cancer Society prostate cancer screening guideline. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60: 68-9
4. Greene KL, Albertsen PC, Babaian RJ, et al,. Prostate specific antigen best practice statement: 2009 update. J Urol 2009; 182: 2232-41
5. Abrahamsson PA, Artibani W, Chapple CR, Wirth M,. European Association of Urology position statement on screening for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 270-1
6. Heidenreich A, Bolla M, Janian S, et al,. Guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 68-80
7. 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)
8. Online Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator. Accessed June 1 2010
9. 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
10. Kranse R, Roobol M, Schroder FH,. A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis. Prostate 2008; 68: 1674-80
11. Online European Randomized Trial of Prostate Cancer risk calculator. Accessed June 1 2010
12. 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
13. 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 2009; 103: 609-14
14. Kaplan DJ, Boorjian SA, Ruth K, et al,. Evaluation of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk calculator in a high-risk screening population. BJU Int 2010; 105: 334-7
15. Parekh DJ, Ankerst DP, Baillargeon J, et al,. Assessment of 54 biomarkers for biopsy-detectable prostate cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007; 16: 1966-72 (Pubitemid 47621169)
16. 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: 1152-5 (Pubitemid 44880388)
17. Eyre SJ, Ankerst DP, Wei JT, et al,. Validation in a multiple urology practice cohort of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator for predicting prostate cancer detection. J Urol 2009; 182: 2653-8
18. Nguyen CT, Yu C, Moussa A, Kattan MW, Jones JS,. Performance of prostate cancer prevention trial risk calculator in a contemporary cohort screened for prostate cancer and diagnosed by extended prostate biopsy. J Urol 2009; 183: 529-33
19. Cavadas V, Osorio L, Sabell F, Teves F, Branco F, Silva-Ramos M,. Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators: a performance comparison in a contemporary screened cohort. Eur Urol 2010; 58: 551-8
20. Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al,. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000; 163: 152-7
21. Pepe ML, Longton GM, Janes H,. Estimation and Comparison of Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves. UW Biostatistics Working Paper Series. The Berkeley Electronic Press, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2008: 323.
22. Steyerberg EW, Vickers AJ, Cook NR, et al,. Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology 2010; 21: 128-38
23. Al-Azab R, Toi A, Lockwood G, Kulkarni GS, Fleshner N,. Prostate volume is strongest predictor of cancer diagnosis at transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy with prostate-specific antigen values between 2.0 and 9.0 ng/mL. Urology 2007; 69: 103-7 (Pubitemid 46161699)
24. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al,. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 215-24 (Pubitemid 36859473)
25. Crawford ED, Abrahamsson PA,. PSA-based screening for prostate cancer: how does it compare with other cancer screening tests? Eur Urol 2008; 54: 262-73
26. Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, et al,. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2010; 183: 963-8