Development and multi‐institutional validation of an upgrading risk tool for Gleason 6 prostate cancer

BACKGROUND Many patients with low‐risk prostate cancer (PC) who are diagnosed with Gleason score 6 at biopsy are ultimately found to harbor higher grade PC (Gleason ≥ 7) at radical prostatectomy. This finding increases risk of recurrence and cancer‐specific mortality. Validated clinical tools that a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cancer 2013-11, Vol.119 (22), p.3992-4002
Hauptverfasser: Truong, Matthew, Slezak, Jon A., Lin, Chee Paul, Iremashvili, Viacheslav, Sado, Martins, Razmaria, Aria A., Leverson, Glen, Soloway, Mark S., Eggener, Scott E., Abel, E. Jason, Downs, Tracy M., Jarrard, David F.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND Many patients with low‐risk prostate cancer (PC) who are diagnosed with Gleason score 6 at biopsy are ultimately found to harbor higher grade PC (Gleason ≥ 7) at radical prostatectomy. This finding increases risk of recurrence and cancer‐specific mortality. Validated clinical tools that are available preoperatively are needed to improve the ability to recognize likelihood of upgrading in patients with low‐risk PC. METHODS More than 30 clinicopathologic parameters were assessed in consecutive patients with Gleason 6 PC upon biopsy who underwent radical prostatectomy. A nomogram for predicting upgrading (Gleason ≥ 7) on final pathology was generated using multivariable logistic regression in a development cohort of 431 patients. External validation was performed in 2 separate cohorts consisting of 1151 patients and 392 patients. Nomogram performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, calibration, and decision analysis. RESULTS On multivariable analysis, variables predicting upgrading were prostate‐specific antigen density using ultrasound (odds ratio [OR] = 229, P = .003), obesity (OR = 1.90, P = .05), number of positive cores (OR = 1.23, P = .01), and maximum core involvement (OR = 0.02, P = .01). On internal validation, the bootstrap‐corrected predictive accuracy was 0.753. External validation revealed a predictive accuracy of 0.677 and 0.672. The nomogram demonstrated excellent calibration in all 3 cohorts and decision curves demonstrated high net benefit across a wide range of threshold probabilities. The nomogram demonstrated areas under the curve of 0.597 to 0.672 for predicting upgrading in subsets of men with very low‐risk PC who meet active surveillance criteria (all P 
ISSN:0008-543X
1097-0142
DOI:10.1002/cncr.28303