Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Verbeek, J., Nieboer, D., Bangma, C., Roobol, M.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2342
Resumo: Background: Multivariable risk calculators (RCs) predicting prostate cancer (PCa) aim to reduce unnecessary workup (e.g., MRI and biopsy) by selectively identifying those men at risk for PCa or clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (Gleason ≥7). The lack of an adequate comparison makes choosing between RCs difficult for patients, clinicians and guideline developers. We aim to perform a head-to-head comparison of seven well known RCs predicting biopsy outcome. Methods: Our study comprised 7,119 men from ten independent contemporary cohorts in Europe and Australia, who underwent prostate biopsy between 2007 and 2015. We evaluated the performance of the ERSPC RPCRC, Finne, Chun, ProstataClass, Karakiewicz, Sunnybrook, and PCPT 2.0 (HG) RCs in predicting the presence of any PCa and csPCa. Performance was assessed by discrimination, calibration and net benefit analyses. Results: A total of 3,458 (48%) PCa were detected; 1,784 (25%) men had csPCa. No particular RC stood out predicting any PCa: pooled area under the ROC-curve (AUC) ranged between 0.64 and 0.72. The ERSPC RPCRC had the highest pooled AUC 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80) when predicting csPCa. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed limited net benefit in the detection of csPCa, but that can be improved by a simple calibration step. The main limitation is the retrospective design of the study. Conclusions: No particular RC stands out when predicting biopsy outcome on the presence of any PCa. The ERSPC RPCRC is superior in identifying those men at risk for csPCa. Net benefit analyses show that a multivariate approach before further workup is advisable.
id RCAP_64f1797f66c2abbaef32ca0fd00adb94
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.chporto.pt:10400.16/2342
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcomeProstate biopsyoverdiagnosisprostate cancer (PCa)prostate-specific antigen (PSA)risk calculators (RCs)Background: Multivariable risk calculators (RCs) predicting prostate cancer (PCa) aim to reduce unnecessary workup (e.g., MRI and biopsy) by selectively identifying those men at risk for PCa or clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (Gleason ≥7). The lack of an adequate comparison makes choosing between RCs difficult for patients, clinicians and guideline developers. We aim to perform a head-to-head comparison of seven well known RCs predicting biopsy outcome. Methods: Our study comprised 7,119 men from ten independent contemporary cohorts in Europe and Australia, who underwent prostate biopsy between 2007 and 2015. We evaluated the performance of the ERSPC RPCRC, Finne, Chun, ProstataClass, Karakiewicz, Sunnybrook, and PCPT 2.0 (HG) RCs in predicting the presence of any PCa and csPCa. Performance was assessed by discrimination, calibration and net benefit analyses. Results: A total of 3,458 (48%) PCa were detected; 1,784 (25%) men had csPCa. No particular RC stood out predicting any PCa: pooled area under the ROC-curve (AUC) ranged between 0.64 and 0.72. The ERSPC RPCRC had the highest pooled AUC 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80) when predicting csPCa. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed limited net benefit in the detection of csPCa, but that can be improved by a simple calibration step. The main limitation is the retrospective design of the study. Conclusions: No particular RC stands out when predicting biopsy outcome on the presence of any PCa. The ERSPC RPCRC is superior in identifying those men at risk for csPCa. Net benefit analyses show that a multivariate approach before further workup is advisable.AME PubRepositório Científico do Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo AntónioPereira-Azevedo, NunoVerbeek, J.Nieboer, D.Bangma, C.Roobol, M.2020-03-24T11:21:12Z2018-022018-02-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2342engPereira-Azevedo N, Verbeek JFM, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ. Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome. Transl Androl Urol. 2018;7(1):18–26. doi:10.21037/tau.2017.12.212223-469110.21037/tau.2017.12.21info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-10-20T11:00:23Zoai:repositorio.chporto.pt:10400.16/2342Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:38:33.303963Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
title Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
spellingShingle Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
Prostate biopsy
overdiagnosis
prostate cancer (PCa)
prostate-specific antigen (PSA)
risk calculators (RCs)
title_short Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
title_full Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
title_fullStr Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
title_full_unstemmed Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
title_sort Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome
author Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
author_facet Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
Verbeek, J.
Nieboer, D.
Bangma, C.
Roobol, M.
author_role author
author2 Verbeek, J.
Nieboer, D.
Bangma, C.
Roobol, M.
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico do Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
Verbeek, J.
Nieboer, D.
Bangma, C.
Roobol, M.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Prostate biopsy
overdiagnosis
prostate cancer (PCa)
prostate-specific antigen (PSA)
risk calculators (RCs)
topic Prostate biopsy
overdiagnosis
prostate cancer (PCa)
prostate-specific antigen (PSA)
risk calculators (RCs)
description Background: Multivariable risk calculators (RCs) predicting prostate cancer (PCa) aim to reduce unnecessary workup (e.g., MRI and biopsy) by selectively identifying those men at risk for PCa or clinically significant PCa (csPCa) (Gleason ≥7). The lack of an adequate comparison makes choosing between RCs difficult for patients, clinicians and guideline developers. We aim to perform a head-to-head comparison of seven well known RCs predicting biopsy outcome. Methods: Our study comprised 7,119 men from ten independent contemporary cohorts in Europe and Australia, who underwent prostate biopsy between 2007 and 2015. We evaluated the performance of the ERSPC RPCRC, Finne, Chun, ProstataClass, Karakiewicz, Sunnybrook, and PCPT 2.0 (HG) RCs in predicting the presence of any PCa and csPCa. Performance was assessed by discrimination, calibration and net benefit analyses. Results: A total of 3,458 (48%) PCa were detected; 1,784 (25%) men had csPCa. No particular RC stood out predicting any PCa: pooled area under the ROC-curve (AUC) ranged between 0.64 and 0.72. The ERSPC RPCRC had the highest pooled AUC 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80) when predicting csPCa. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed limited net benefit in the detection of csPCa, but that can be improved by a simple calibration step. The main limitation is the retrospective design of the study. Conclusions: No particular RC stands out when predicting biopsy outcome on the presence of any PCa. The ERSPC RPCRC is superior in identifying those men at risk for csPCa. Net benefit analyses show that a multivariate approach before further workup is advisable.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-02
2018-02-01T00:00:00Z
2020-03-24T11:21:12Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2342
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2342
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Pereira-Azevedo N, Verbeek JFM, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ. Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome. Transl Androl Urol. 2018;7(1):18–26. doi:10.21037/tau.2017.12.21
2223-4691
10.21037/tau.2017.12.21
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv AME Pub
publisher.none.fl_str_mv AME Pub
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133646427258880