Prospective validation of a risk calculator which calculates the probability of a positive prostate biopsy in a contemporary clinical cohort

European Journal of Cancer

Volumn 48, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 1809-1815

  Van Vugt, Heidi A ^a   Kranse, Ries ^b   Steyerberg, Ewout W ^a   Van Der Poel, Henk G ^c   Busstra, Martijn ^a   Kil, Paul ^d   Oomens, Eric H ^e   De Jong, Igle J ^f   Bangma, Chris H ^a   Roobol, Monique J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Dutch Cancer Registry   (Netherlands)

^c ANTONI VAN LEEUWENHOEK HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^d Microvida Laboratory for Medical Microbiology and Immunology   (Netherlands)

^e AMPHIA HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^f UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Clinical setting; Prediction model; Prostate biopsy; Prostate cancer; Prostate cancer risk calculator; Validation

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; EUROPEAN RANDOMISED STUDY OF SCREENING FOR PROSTATE CANCER; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NETHERLANDS; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCREENING TEST; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; ULTRASOUND; VALIDATION STUDY;

AGED; BIOPSY; COHORT STUDIES; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84864118135     PISSN: 09598049     EISSN: 18790852     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. G. Trottier, M.J. Roobol, and N. Lawrentschuk 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 Int 108 2011 E237 E244
2. M.J. Roobol, E.W. Steyerberg, and R. Kranse A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer Eur Urol 57 2010 79 85
3. A. Gupta, M.J. Roobol, and C.J. Savage A four-kallikrein panel for the prediction of repeat prostate biopsy: data from the European Randomized Study of Prostate Cancer screening in Rotterdam, Netherlands Br J Cancer 103 2010 708 714
4. E.W. Steyerberg Clinical Prediction Models A Practical Approach to Development, Validation, and Updating 2009 Springer New york, USA
5. R. Kranse, M. Roobol, and F.H. Schroder A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis Prostate 68 2008 1674 1680
6. R. Kranse, P. Beemsterboer, and J. Rietbergen Predictors for biopsy outcome in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (Rotterdam region) Prostate 39 1999 316 322
7. M.J. Roobol, W.J. Kirkels, and F.H. Schroder Features and preliminary results of the Dutch centre of the ERSPC (Rotterdam, the Netherlands) BJU Int 92 Suppl. 2 2003 48 54
8. E.R. DeLong, D.M. DeLong, and D.L. Clarke-Pearson Comparing the areas under two of more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach Biometrics 44 1988 837 845
9. A. Heidenreich, J. Bellmunt, and M. Bolla EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease Eur Urol 59 2011 61 71
10. A.J. Vickers, and A.M. Cronin Traditional statistical methods for evaluating prediction models are uninformative as to clinical value: towards a decision analytic framework Semin Oncol 37 2010 31 38
11. E.W. Steyerberg, M.J. Roobol, and M.W. Kattan Prediction of indolent prostate cancer: validation and updating of a prognostic nomogram J Urol 177 2007 107 112 [discussion 12]
12. F.H. Schroder, and R. Kranse Verification bias and the prostate-specific antigen test - is there a case for a lower threshold for biopsy? N Engl J Med 349 2003 393 395
13. C. Gosselaar, R. Kranse, M.J. Roobol, S. Roemeling, and F.H. Schroder The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomised trial for the screening of prostate cancer Prostate 68 2008 985 993
14. S.J. Boevee, L.D. Venderbos, and T.L. Tammela Change of tumour characteristics and treatment over time in both arms of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Eur J Cancer 46 2010 3082 3089
15. C. Gosselaar, M.J. Roobol, and S. Roemeling The value of an additional hypoechoic lesion-directed biopsy core for detecting prostate cancer BJU Int 101 2008 685 690
16. V. Cavadas, L. Osorio, and F. Sabell 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 58 2010 551 558
17. R.C. van den Bergh, M.J. Roobol, T. Wolters, P.J. van Leeuwen, and F.H. Schroder 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 102 2008 1068 1073
18. R. Al-Azab, A. Toi, G. Lockwood, G.S. Kulkarni, and N. Fleshner 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 69 2007 103 107
19. P.G. Hammerer, J.E. McNeal, and T.A. Stamey Correlation between serum prostate specific antigen levels and the volume of the individual glandular zones of the human prostate J Urol 153 1995 111 114
20. V. Scattoni Systematic prostate biopsies are more and more often becoming saturation biopsies Eur Urol 50 2006 202 204
21. P.I. Karakiewicz, M. Bazinet, and A.G. Aprikian Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume Urology 49 1997 55 59
22. G. Guichard, S. Larre, and A. Gallina Extended 21-sample needle biopsy protocol for diagnosis of prostate cancer in 1000 consecutive patients Eur Urol 52 2007 430 435
23. J.J. Liu, J.D. Brooks, M. Ferrari, R. Nolley, and J.C. Presti Jr. Small prostate size and high grade disease-biology or artifact? J Urol 185 2011 2108 2111
24. M.E. Chen, P. Troncoso, D. Johnston, K. Tang, and R.J. Babaian Prostate cancer detection: relationship to prostate size Urology 53 1999 764 768
25. H.A. van Vugt, M.J. Roobol, and R. Kranse Prediction of prostate cancer in unscreened men: external validation of a risk calculator Eur J Cancer 47 2011 903 909
26. M.G. Neill, A. Toi, and G.A. Lockwood Systematic lateral prostate biopsy - are the benefits worth the costs? J Urol 179 2008 1321 1326
27. J.L. Gore, S.F. Shariat, and B.J. Miles Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer J Urol 165 2001 1554 1559
28. G.C. Durkan, N. Sheikh, P. Johnson, A.J. Hildreth, and D.R. Greene Improving prostate cancer detection with an extended-core transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy protocol BJU Int 89 2002 33 39
29. M.W. Kattan Validating a prognostic model Cancer 107 2006 2523 2524
30. K. Eichler, S. Hempel, and J. Wilby Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: a systematic review J Urol 175 2006 1605 1612
31. M. Bul, P.J. van Leeuwen, X. Zhu, F.H. Schröder, and M.J. Roobol Prostate cancer incidence and disease-specific survival of men with initial prostate-specific antigen less than 3 ng/ml who are participating in the ERSPC Rotterdam Eur Urol 59 2011 498 505
32. P.J. van Leeuwen, D. Connolly, and T.L. Tammela Balancing the harms and benefits of early detection of prostate cancer Cancer 116 2010 4857 4865