4.7 Article

Pattern of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure dictates the probability of a positive bone scan in patients with an increasing PSA after radical prostatectorny

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 9, Pages 1962-1968

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.058

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P50 CA058204, P50 CA092629, P50-CA58204] Funding Source: Medline
  2. CSR NIH HHS [IRGICA76423-0IRI] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Physicians often order periodic bone scans (BS) to check for metastases in patients with an increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA; biochemical recurrence [BCRI]) after radical prostatectomy (RP), but most scans are negative. We studied patient characteristics to build a predictive model for a positive scan. Patients and Methods From our prostate cancer database we identified all patients with detectable PSA after RP. We analyzed the following features at the time of each bone scan for association with a positive BS: preoperative PSA, time to BCR, pathologic findings of the RP, PSA before the BS (trigger PSA), PSA kinetics (PSA doubling time, PSA slope, and PSA velocity), and time from BCR to BS. The results were incorporated into a predictive model. Results There were 414 BS performed in 239 patients with BCR and no history of androgen deprivation therapy. Only 60 (14.5%) were positive for metastases. In univariate analysis, preoperative PSA (P = .04), seminal vesicle invasion (P = .02), PSA velocity (P < .001), and trigger PSA (P < .001) predicted a positive BS. In multivariate analysis, only PSA slope (odds ratio [OR], 2.71; P = .03), PSA velocity (OR, 0.93; P = .003), and trigger PSA (OR, 1.022; P < .001) predicted a positive BS. A nomogram for predicting the bone scan result was constructed with an overfit-corrected concordance index of 0.93. Conclusion Trigger PSA, PSA velocity, and slope were associated with a positive BS. A highly discriminating nomogram can be used to select patients according to their risk for a positive scan. Omitting scans in low-risk patients could reduce substantially the number of scans ordered. (c) 2005 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available