Nomograms and instruments for the initial prostate evaluation: The ability to estimate the likelihood of identifying prostate cancer

Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Seminars in Urologic Oncology 06/2002; 20(2):116-22. DOI: 10.1053/suro.2002.32520
Source: PubMed


As a result of prostate cancer screening programs, approximately 10% of otherwise healthy men will be found to have an elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and therefore be at risk for harboring prostate cancer. Patients with an elevated PSA level have a wide variation in the risk for having prostate cancer diagnosed by transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. To adequately counsel these patients, some form of individualized risk assessment must be given. There are several tables, artificial neural network (ANN) models, and nomograms that are available to stratify an individual patients risk for having prostate cancer diagnosed by a TRUS biopsy, either initially or on subsequent biopsies after a previous negative biopsy. Presently, nomograms are also being developed to predict the risk not only for having prostate cancer but also for clinically significant prostate cancer. The difficulty in calculating this risk for an individual patient is that the multiple competing clinical and pathologic factors have varying degrees of effect on the overall risk. This problem of competing risk factors can be overcome by the use of nomograms or ANNs. This article reviews the available instruments that are available to the urologist to enable prediction of the risk for having prostate cancer diagnosed by TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

2 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Artificial neural networks (ANN) represent an interesting alternative methodological approach to predict prostate cancer related outcomes on an individual basis. Constructed by flexible, nonlinear regression models, they have the potential to offer enhanced goodness-of-fit and predictive ability over traditional linear models. However, this potential comes at the price of increased complexity in modeling building and validation. Therefore, despite their promotion in the field of prostate cancer since the early 1990 s, due to less transparency and the need for computational infrastructure, ANNs have become less popular. Their utility hinges on appropriate implementation and validation, which unfortunately is only recently being recognized and addressed. In this chapter, the reader is provided with a descriptive and an analytic tabulation of decision aid criteria for ANNs for prostate cancer detection.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of the current study was to develop a model for predicting the presence of prostate carcinoma using clinical, laboratory, and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) data. Data were collected on 1237 referred men with serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels < or = 10 ng/mL who underwent an initial prostate biopsy. Variables analyzed included age, race, family history, referral indication(s), prior vasectomy, digital rectal examination (DRE), PSA level, PSA density (PSAD), and TRUS findings. Twenty percent of the data were reserved randomly for study validation. Logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the relative risk, 95% confidence interval, and P values. Independent predictors of a positive biopsy result included elevated PSAD, abnormal DRE, hypoechoic TRUS finding, and age 75 years or older. Based on these variables, a predictive nomogram was developed. The sensitivity and specificity of the model were 92% and 24%, respectively, in the validation study for which the predictive probability > or = 10% was used to indicate the presence of prostate carcinoma. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the model was 73%, which was significantly higher compared with the prediction based on PSA alone (AUC, 62%). If it was validated externally, then application of this model to the biopsy decision could result in a 24% reduction in unnecessary biopsy procedures, with an overall reduction of 20%. Incorporation of clinical, laboratory, and TRUS data into a prebiopsy nomogram significantly improved the prediction of prostate carcinoma over the use of individual factors alone. Predictive nomograms may serve as an aid to patient counseling regarding prostate biopsy outcome and to reduce the number of unnecessary biopsy procedures.
    Cancer 10/2003; 98(7):1417-22. DOI:10.1002/cncr.11668 · 4.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer researchers, clinicians, and the public are increasingly interested in statistical models designed to predict the occurrence of cancer. As the number and sophistication of cancer risk prediction models have grown, so too has interest in ensuring that they are appropriately applied, correctly developed, and rigorously evaluated. On May 20–21, 2004, the National Cancer Institute sponsored a workshop in which experts identified strengths and limitations of cancer and genetic susceptibility prediction models that were currently in use and under development and explored methodologic issues related to their development, evaluation, and validation. Participants also identified research priorities and resources in the areas of 1) revising existing breast cancer risk assessment models and developing new models, 2) encouraging the development of new risk models, 3) obtaining data to develop more accurate risk models, 4) supporting validation mechanisms and resources, 5) strengthening model development efforts and encouraging coordination, and 6) promoting effective cancer risk communication and decision-making.
    Journal of the National Cancer Institute 06/2005; 97(10):715-23. DOI:10.1093/jnci/dji128 · 12.58 Impact Factor
Show more