Prostate cancer prevention trial risk calculator 2.0 for the prediction of low- vs high-grade prostate cancer

Urology

Volumn 83, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1362-1368

  Ankerst, Donna P ^a,b,c   Hoefler, Josef ^c   Bock, Sebastian ^a   Goodman, Phyllis J ^d   Vickers, Andrew ^e   Hernandez, Javier ^a   Sokoll, Lori J ^f   Sanda, Martin G ^g   Wei, John T ^h   Leach, Robin J ^a   Thompson, Ian M ^a  

^a Mays Cancer Center at UT Health San Antonio   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^d Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^e MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^f DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^g EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICAN; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; FAMILY HISTORY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR;

AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; ODDS RATIO; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PRIMARY PREVENTION; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84901398629     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.035     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. A.A. Aizer, J.J. Paly, and A.L. Zietman et al. Models of care and NCCN guideline adherence in very-low-risk prostate cancer J Natl Compr Canc Netw 11 2013 1364 1372
2. L. Klotz, L. Zhang, and A. Lam et al. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 28 2010 126 131
3. T.J. Wilt, M.K. Brawer, and K.M. Jones et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer N Engl J Med 367 2012 203 213
4. I.M. Thompson, D.P. Ankerst, and C. Chi et al. Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial J Natl Cancer Inst 98 2006 529 534
5. D.P. Ankerst, J. Groskopf, and J.R. Day et al. Predicting prostate cancer risk through incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3 J Urol 180 2008 1303 1308
6. Y. Liang, D.P. Ankerst, and N.S. Ketchum et al. Prospective evaluation of operating characteristics of prostate cancer detection biomarkers J Urol 185 2011 104 110
7. D.P. Ankerst, T. Koniarski, and Y. Liang et al. Updating risk prediction tools: a case study in prostate cancer Biom J 54 2012 127 142
8. I.M. Thompson, P.J. Goodman, and C.M. Tangen et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer N Engl J Med 349 2003 215 224
9. A.J. Vickers, A.M. Cronin, and M.J. Roobol et al. The relationship between prostate-specific antigen and prostate cancer risk: the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group Clin Cancer Res 16 2010 4374 4381
10. D.P. Ankerst, A. Boeck, and S.J. Freedland et al. Evaluating the PCPT risk calculator in ten international biopsy cohorts: results from the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group World J Urol 30 2012 181 187
11. L.J. Sokoll, M.G. Sanda, and Z. Feng et al. A prospective, multicenter National Cancer Institute Early Detection Research Network study of [-2]proPSA: improving prostate cancer detection and correlating with cancer aggressiveness Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19 2010 1193 1200
12. D.P. Ankerst, C. Till, and A. Boeck et al. The impact of prostate volume, number of biopsy cores and American Urological Association symptom score on the sensitivity of cancer detection using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator J Urol 190 2013 70 76