A new preoperative nomogram to predict minimal prostate cancer

Accuracy and error rates compared to other tools to select patients for active surveillance

Beverley A. O'Brien, Ronald J. Cohen, Andrew Ryan, Shomik Sengupta, John Mills

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We designed and fully evaluated the performance of a nomogram to identify patients with prostate cancer who may be suitable for active surveillance. Materials and Methods: We developed a nomogram to predict the probability of minimal prostate cancer (total tumor volume less than 0.5 cc, organ confined disease and no Gleason pattern 4 or 5) using preoperative data on 2,525 Australian patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Accuracy and error rates at multiple probability cutoffs were compared with those of contemporary Epstein criteria and the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance trial inclusion criteria when applied to these patients. High risk disease was defined as 1 or more adverse characteristics (including positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion, extracapsular extension, 50% or greater Gleason pattern 4/5 and/or tumor volume 4.0 cc or greater) at radical prostatectomy. Results: Minimal cancer was confirmed in 152 men (6.0%) at prostatectomy. The bootstrap corrected predictive accuracy of our nomogram was 93.3% vs 89.1% and 91.0% for Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria, respectively. For men with a nomogram derived minimal cancer probability of 0% to 4.9%, 5.0% to 19.9%, 20.0% to 34.9%, 35.0% to 49.9% and 50.0% to 71.0% the rate of high risk disease was 70.8%, 37.8%, 22.4%, 9.0% and 3.8%, respectively. In contrast, the rate of high risk disease for men who met Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria were 17.1% and 13.9%, respectively. Conclusions: A detailed breakdown of the expected rates of false-positive results and high risk disease associated with the nomogram derived probability of minimal cancer would provide more complete information to clinicians and patients on which to base therapeutic clinical decisions for presumed early stage prostate cancer.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1811-1817
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume186
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2011

Keywords

  • Australia
  • nomograms
  • prostate
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • risk

Cite this

@article{7b49c2691adc479483f2789d58f24c1d,
title = "A new preoperative nomogram to predict minimal prostate cancer: Accuracy and error rates compared to other tools to select patients for active surveillance",
abstract = "Purpose: We designed and fully evaluated the performance of a nomogram to identify patients with prostate cancer who may be suitable for active surveillance. Materials and Methods: We developed a nomogram to predict the probability of minimal prostate cancer (total tumor volume less than 0.5 cc, organ confined disease and no Gleason pattern 4 or 5) using preoperative data on 2,525 Australian patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Accuracy and error rates at multiple probability cutoffs were compared with those of contemporary Epstein criteria and the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance trial inclusion criteria when applied to these patients. High risk disease was defined as 1 or more adverse characteristics (including positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion, extracapsular extension, 50{\%} or greater Gleason pattern 4/5 and/or tumor volume 4.0 cc or greater) at radical prostatectomy. Results: Minimal cancer was confirmed in 152 men (6.0{\%}) at prostatectomy. The bootstrap corrected predictive accuracy of our nomogram was 93.3{\%} vs 89.1{\%} and 91.0{\%} for Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria, respectively. For men with a nomogram derived minimal cancer probability of 0{\%} to 4.9{\%}, 5.0{\%} to 19.9{\%}, 20.0{\%} to 34.9{\%}, 35.0{\%} to 49.9{\%} and 50.0{\%} to 71.0{\%} the rate of high risk disease was 70.8{\%}, 37.8{\%}, 22.4{\%}, 9.0{\%} and 3.8{\%}, respectively. In contrast, the rate of high risk disease for men who met Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria were 17.1{\%} and 13.9{\%}, respectively. Conclusions: A detailed breakdown of the expected rates of false-positive results and high risk disease associated with the nomogram derived probability of minimal cancer would provide more complete information to clinicians and patients on which to base therapeutic clinical decisions for presumed early stage prostate cancer.",
keywords = "Australia, nomograms, prostate, prostatic neoplasms, risk",
author = "O'Brien, {Beverley A.} and Cohen, {Ronald J.} and Andrew Ryan and Shomik Sengupta and John Mills",
year = "2011",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2011.06.060",
language = "English",
volume = "186",
pages = "1811--1817",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "American Urological Association",
number = "5",

}

A new preoperative nomogram to predict minimal prostate cancer : Accuracy and error rates compared to other tools to select patients for active surveillance. / O'Brien, Beverley A.; Cohen, Ronald J.; Ryan, Andrew; Sengupta, Shomik; Mills, John.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 186, No. 5, 11.2011, p. 1811-1817.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A new preoperative nomogram to predict minimal prostate cancer

T2 - Accuracy and error rates compared to other tools to select patients for active surveillance

AU - O'Brien, Beverley A.

AU - Cohen, Ronald J.

AU - Ryan, Andrew

AU - Sengupta, Shomik

AU - Mills, John

PY - 2011/11

Y1 - 2011/11

N2 - Purpose: We designed and fully evaluated the performance of a nomogram to identify patients with prostate cancer who may be suitable for active surveillance. Materials and Methods: We developed a nomogram to predict the probability of minimal prostate cancer (total tumor volume less than 0.5 cc, organ confined disease and no Gleason pattern 4 or 5) using preoperative data on 2,525 Australian patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Accuracy and error rates at multiple probability cutoffs were compared with those of contemporary Epstein criteria and the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance trial inclusion criteria when applied to these patients. High risk disease was defined as 1 or more adverse characteristics (including positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion, extracapsular extension, 50% or greater Gleason pattern 4/5 and/or tumor volume 4.0 cc or greater) at radical prostatectomy. Results: Minimal cancer was confirmed in 152 men (6.0%) at prostatectomy. The bootstrap corrected predictive accuracy of our nomogram was 93.3% vs 89.1% and 91.0% for Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria, respectively. For men with a nomogram derived minimal cancer probability of 0% to 4.9%, 5.0% to 19.9%, 20.0% to 34.9%, 35.0% to 49.9% and 50.0% to 71.0% the rate of high risk disease was 70.8%, 37.8%, 22.4%, 9.0% and 3.8%, respectively. In contrast, the rate of high risk disease for men who met Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria were 17.1% and 13.9%, respectively. Conclusions: A detailed breakdown of the expected rates of false-positive results and high risk disease associated with the nomogram derived probability of minimal cancer would provide more complete information to clinicians and patients on which to base therapeutic clinical decisions for presumed early stage prostate cancer.

AB - Purpose: We designed and fully evaluated the performance of a nomogram to identify patients with prostate cancer who may be suitable for active surveillance. Materials and Methods: We developed a nomogram to predict the probability of minimal prostate cancer (total tumor volume less than 0.5 cc, organ confined disease and no Gleason pattern 4 or 5) using preoperative data on 2,525 Australian patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Accuracy and error rates at multiple probability cutoffs were compared with those of contemporary Epstein criteria and the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance trial inclusion criteria when applied to these patients. High risk disease was defined as 1 or more adverse characteristics (including positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion, extracapsular extension, 50% or greater Gleason pattern 4/5 and/or tumor volume 4.0 cc or greater) at radical prostatectomy. Results: Minimal cancer was confirmed in 152 men (6.0%) at prostatectomy. The bootstrap corrected predictive accuracy of our nomogram was 93.3% vs 89.1% and 91.0% for Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria, respectively. For men with a nomogram derived minimal cancer probability of 0% to 4.9%, 5.0% to 19.9%, 20.0% to 34.9%, 35.0% to 49.9% and 50.0% to 71.0% the rate of high risk disease was 70.8%, 37.8%, 22.4%, 9.0% and 3.8%, respectively. In contrast, the rate of high risk disease for men who met Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and Epstein criteria were 17.1% and 13.9%, respectively. Conclusions: A detailed breakdown of the expected rates of false-positive results and high risk disease associated with the nomogram derived probability of minimal cancer would provide more complete information to clinicians and patients on which to base therapeutic clinical decisions for presumed early stage prostate cancer.

KW - Australia

KW - nomograms

KW - prostate

KW - prostatic neoplasms

KW - risk

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053945325&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2011.06.060

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2011.06.060

M3 - Article

VL - 186

SP - 1811

EP - 1817

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 5

ER -