4.2 Article

Nomogram using transrectal ultrasound-derived information predicting the detection of high grade prostate cancer on initial biopsy

Journal

PROSTATE INTERNATIONAL
Volume 1, Issue 2, Pages 69-75

Publisher

ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.12954/PI.12008

Keywords

Prostatic neoplasms; Biopsy; Nomograms; Ultrasonography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To develop a nomogram using transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-derived information for predicting high grade (HG) prostate cancer (PCa) on initial biopsy. Methods: Data were collected on 1,048 men with serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels 4.0 to 9.9 ng/mL who underwent an initial prostate biopsy. Two logistic regression-based nomograms were constructed to predict the detection of PCa. Nomogram-1 incorporated age, digital rectal examination, PSA and percent free PSA data, whereas nomogram-2 incorporated those factors plus TRUS-derived information (i. e., prostate volume and the presence of hypoechoic lesions). The prediction of any PCa and HGPCa (Gleason score= 7) were determined. Twenty percent of the data were randomly reserved for study validation, and the predictive accuracies of the two nomograms were directly compared. Results: Of the 1,048 men who underwent biopsy, 216 (20.6%) were found to have any PCa, and 97 (9.3%) were found to have HGPCa. All six risk factors were found to be independent predictors for both any PCa and HGPCa. The area under curve (AUC) for nomogram-2 was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.81) for predicting any PCa, and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88) for predicting HGPCa. These AUCs were greater than those for nomogram-1 (0.72 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.76 for any PCa; P< 0.001], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.72 to 0.83 for HGPCa; P< 0.001]). Removing the TRUS-derived information from nomogram-2 resulted in an incremental AUC decrease of 0.052 for any PCa and 0.063 for HGPCa. Conclusions: The nomogram using TRUS-derived information had a high predictive accuracy for HGPCa on initial prostate biopsy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available