External validation of Cormio nomogram for predicting all prostate cancers and clinically significant prostate cancers.
Nomograms
Prostate biopsy
Prostatic hyperplasia
Prostatic neoplasms
Validation
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Oct 2020
Historique:
received:
22
09
2019
accepted:
12
12
2019
pubmed:
8
1
2020
medline:
27
5
2021
entrez:
8
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Recently, the Cormio et al. nomogram has been developed to predict prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa using benign prostatic obstruction parameters. The aim of the present study was to externally validate the nomogram in a multicentric cohort. Between 2013 and 2019, patients scheduled for ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy were prospectively enrolled at 11 Italian institutions. Demographic, clinical and histological data were collected and analysed. Discrimination and calibration of Cormio nomogram were assessed with the receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve and calibration plots. The clinical net benefit of the nomogram was assessed with decision curve analysis. Clinically significant PCa was defined as ISUP grade group > 1. After accounting for inclusion criteria, 1377 patients were analysed. 816/1377 (59%) had cancer at final pathology (574/816, 70%, clinically significant PCa). Multivariable analysis showed age, prostate volume, DRE and post-voided residual volume as independent predictors of any PCa. Discrimination of the nomogram for cancer was 0.70 on ROC analysis. Calibration of the nomogram was excellent (p = 0.94) and the nomogram presented a net benefit in the 40-80% range of probabilities. Multivariable analysis for predictors of clinically significant PCa found age, PSA, prostate volume and DRE as independent variables. Discrimination of the nomogram was 0.73. Calibration was poor (p = 0.001) and the nomogram presented a net benefit in the 25-75% range of probabilities. We confirmed that the Cormio nomogram can be used to predict the risk of PCa in patients at increased risk. Implementation of the nomogram in clinical practice will better define its role in the patient's counselling before prostate biopsy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31907633
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-03058-1
pii: 10.1007/s00345-019-03058-1
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2555-2561Références
EAU guidelines: prostate cancer (2019). https://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/#5 . Accessed 17 Aug 2019
Serag H, Banerjee S, Saeb-Parsy K, Irving S, Wright K, Stearn S et al (2012) Risk profiles of prostate cancers identified from UK primary care using national referral guidelines. Br J Cancer 106:436–439. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.596
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.596
pubmed: 22240787
pmcid: 3273344
Bokhorst LP, Zhu X, Bul M, Bangma CH, Schröder FH, Roobol MJ (2012) Positive predictive value of prostate biopsy indicated by prostate-specific-antigen-based prostate cancer screening: trends over time in a European randomized trial. BJU Int 110:1654–1660. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11481.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11481.x
pubmed: 23043563
Louie KS, Seigneurin A, Cathcart P, Sasieni P (2015) Do prostate cancer risk models improve the predictive accuracy of PSA screening? A meta-analysis. Ann Oncol 26:848–864. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu525
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu525
pubmed: 25403590
Vedder MM, Bekker-Grob EW, Lilja HG, Vickers AJ, Leenders GJ, Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ (2014) The added value of percentage of free to total prostate-specific antigen, PCA3, and a kallikrein panel to the ERSPC risk calculator for prostate cancer in prescreened men. Eur Urol 66(6):1109–1115
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.011
Leyten GH, Hessels D, Jannink SA et al (2014) Prospective multicentre evaluation of PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusions as diagnostic and prognostic urinary biomarkers for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 65(3):534–542
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.014
Boegemann M, Stephan C, Cammann H, Vincendeau S, Houlgatte A, Jung K, Blanchet JS, Semjonow A (2016) The percentage of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) isoform [-2]proPSA and the Prostate Health Index improve the diagnostic accuracy for clinically relevant prostate cancer at initial and repeat biopsy compared with total PSA and percentage free PSA in men aged %3c/=65 years. BJU Int 117(1):72–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13139 (Epub 2015 May 24)
doi: 10.1111/bju.13139
pubmed: 25818705
Bryant RJ, Sjoberg DD, Vickers AJ, Robinson MC, Kumar R, Marsden L, Davis M, Scardino PT, Donovan J, Neal DE, Lilja H, Hamdy FC (2015) Predicting high-grade cancer at ten-core prostate biopsy using four kallikrein markers measured in blood in the ProtecT study. J Natl Cancer Inst. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv095
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djv095
pubmed: 25863334
pmcid: 4554254
Falagario UG, Martini A, Wajswol E et al (2019) Avoiding unnecessary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biopsies: negative and positive predictive value of MRI according to prostate-specific antigen density, 4Kscore and risk calculators. Eur Urol Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.015 (Epub ahead of print)
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.015
pubmed: 31882349
Cormio L, Cindolo L, Troiano F et al (2018) Development and internal validation of novel nomograms based on benign prostatic obstruction-related parameters to predict the risk of prostate cancer at first prostate biopsy. Front Oncol 8:438. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2018.00438 (eCollection 2018)
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00438
pubmed: 30386737
pmcid: 6198078
Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA et al (2016) The 2014 international society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 40:244–252. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530
pubmed: 26492179
Antonelli A, Fugini AV, Tardanico R, Giovanessi L, Zambolin T, Simeone C (2014) The percentage of core involved by cancer is the best predictor of insignificant prostate cancer, according to an updated definition (tumor volume up to 2.5 cm3): analysis of a cohort of 210 consecutive patients with low-risk disease. Urology 83(1):28–32
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.07.056
Autorino R, De Sio M, Di Lorenzo G et al (2005) How to decrease pain during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a look at the literature. J Urol 174(6):2091–2097
doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000181212.51025.06
Azevedo N, Verbeek JFM, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ (2018) Head-to-head comparison of prostate cáncer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome. Transl Androl Urol 7(1):18–26. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2017.12.21
doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.12.21
pubmed: 29594016
pmcid: 5861294
Schoots IG, Padhani AR (2019) Personalizing prostate cancer diagnosis with multivariate risk prediction tools: how should prostate MRI be incorporated? World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02899-0 (Epub ahead of print)
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02899-0
pubmed: 31399825
pmcid: 7064454
Cormio L, Lucarelli G, Selvaggio O et al (2016) Absence of bladder outlet obstruction is an independent risk factor for prostate cancer in men undergoing prostate biopsy. Medicine (Baltimore) 95(7):e2551
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002551
Cormio L, Lucarelli G, Netti GS et al (2015) Post-void residual urinary volume is an independent predictor of biopsy results in men at risk for prostate cancer. Anticancer Res 35(4):2175–2182
pubmed: 25862875
Cicione A, Cormio L, Cantiello F et al (2017) Presence and severity of lower urinary tract symptoms are inversely correlated with the risk of prostate cancer on prostate biopsy. Minerva Urol Nefrol 69(5):486–492
pubmed: 28124868
Kranse R, Roobol M, Schroder FH (2008) A graphical device to represent the outcomes of a logistic regression analysis. Prostate 68:1674–1680
doi: 10.1002/pros.20840
Dong F, Kattan MW, Steyerberg EW et al (2008) Validation of pretreatment nomograms for predicting indolent prostate cancer: efficacy in contemporary urological practice. J Urol 180(1):150–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.053 (discussion 154, Epub 2008 May 15)
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.053
pubmed: 18485398
Roobol MJ, Schröder FH, Hugosson J et al (2012) Importance of prostate volume in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculators: results from the prostate biopsy collaborative group. World J Urol 30(2):149–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-011-0804-y (Epub 2011 Dec 28)
doi: 10.1007/s00345-011-0804-y
pubmed: 22203238
Rove KO, Crawford ED (2012) Randomized controlled screening trials for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen: a tale of contrasts. World J Urol 30(2):137–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-011-0799-4 (Epub 2011 Nov 25)
doi: 10.1007/s00345-011-0799-4
pubmed: 22116599
Moreira DM, Freitas ODM, Nickel JC, Andriole GL, Castro-Santamaria R, Freedland SJ (2017) The combination of histological prostate atrophy and inflammation is associated with lower risk of prostate cancer in biopsy specimens. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 20:413–417. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2017.30
doi: 10.1038/pcan.2017.30
pubmed: 28585572
De Nunzio C, Kramer G, Marberger M, Montironi R, Nelson W, Schröder F et al (2011) The controversial relationship between benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer: the role of inflammation. Eur Urol 60:106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.055
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.055
pubmed: 21497433
Falagario U, Selvaggio O, Carrieri G et al (2018) Prostatic inflammation is associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia rather than prostate cancer. J Gerontol Geriatr 2018(4):178–182
Drost FH, Osses DF, Nieboer D et al (2019) Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD012663. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012663.pub2
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012663.pub2
pubmed: 31022301
van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israël B et al (2019) Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective multicenter clinical study. Eur Urol 75(4):570–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023 (Epub 2018 Nov 23)
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023
pubmed: 30477981
Padhani AR, Barentsz J, Villeirs G et al (2019) PI-RADS Steering Committee: the PI-RADS multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed biopsy pathway. Radiology 292(2):464–474. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182946 (Epub 2019 Jun 11)
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182946
pubmed: 31184561
pmcid: 6677282
Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C et al (2006) Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the prostate cancer prevention trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:529–534
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj131