Risk calculators for the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review

被引:5
|
作者
Denijs, Frederique B. [1 ]
van Harten, Meike J. [2 ]
Meenderink, Jonas J. L. [1 ]
Leenen, Renee C. A. [1 ]
Remmers, Sebastiaan [1 ]
Venderbos, Lionne D. F. [1 ]
van den Bergh, Roderick C. N. [1 ]
Beyer, Katharina [1 ]
Roobol, Monique J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Rotterdam, Erasmus MC Canc Inst, Dept Urol, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Oncol Urol, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
EXTERNAL VALIDATION; PREVENTION TRIAL; INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY; PREDICTION MODEL; BIOPSY; ERSPC; MRI; DIAGNOSIS; NOMOGRAM; STRATIFICATION;
D O I
10.1038/s41391-024-00852-w
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BackgroundProstate cancer (PCa) (early) detection poses significant challenges, including unnecessary testing and the risk of potential overdiagnosis. The European Association of Urology therefore suggests an individual risk-adapted approach, incorporating risk calculators (RCs) into the PCa detection pathway. In the context of 'The PRostate Cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union' (PRAISE-U) project (https://uroweb.org/praise-u), we aim to provide an overview of the currently available clinical RCs applicable in an early PCa detection algorithm.MethodsWe performed a systematic review to identify RCs predicting detection of clinically significant PCa at biopsy. A search was performed in the databases Medline ALL, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar for publications between January 2010 and July 2023. We retrieved relevant literature by using the terms "prostate cancer", "screening/diagnosis" and "predictive model". Inclusion criteria included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical trials. Exclusion criteria applied to studies involving pre-targeted high-risk populations, diagnosed PCa patients, or a sample sizes under 50 men.ResultsWe identified 6474 articles, of which 140 were included after screening abstracts and full texts. In total, we identified 96 unique RCs. Among these, 45 underwent external validation, with 28 validated in multiple cohorts. Of the externally validated RCs, 17 are based on clinical factors, 19 incorporate clinical factors along with MRI details, 4 were based on blood biomarkers alone or in combination with clinical factors, and 5 included urinary biomarkers. The median AUC of externally validated RCs ranged from 0.63 to 0.93.ConclusionsThis systematic review offers an extensive analysis of currently available RCs, their variable utilization, and performance within validation cohorts. RCs have consistently demonstrated their capacity to mitigate the limitations associated with early detection and have been integrated into modern practice and screening trials. Nevertheless, the lack of external validation data raises concerns about numerous RCs, and it is crucial to factor in this omission when evaluating whether a specific RC is applicable to one's target population.
引用
收藏
页码:544 / 557
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Vasectomy and Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Baboudjian, Michael
    Rajwa, Pawel
    Barret, Eric
    Beauval, Jean-Baptiste
    Brureau, Laurent
    Crehange, Gilles
    Dariane, Charles
    Fiard, Gaelle
    Fromont, Gaelle
    Gauthe, Mathieu
    Mathieu, Romain
    Renard-Penna, Raphaele
    Roubaud, Guilhem
    Ruffion, Alain
    Sargos, Paul
    Roupret, Morgan
    Ploussard, Guillaume
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2022, 41 : 35 - 44
  • [42] Body Composition and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies
    Purcell, Sarah A.
    Oliveira, Camila L. P.
    Mackenzie, Michelle
    Robson, Paula
    Lewis, John D.
    Prado, Carla M.
    ADVANCES IN NUTRITION, 2022, 13 (04) : 1118 - 1130
  • [43] Hypertension and risk of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Liang, Zhen
    Xie, Bo
    Li, Jiangfeng
    Wang, Xiao
    Wang, Song
    Meng, Shuai
    Ji, Alin
    Zhu, Yi
    Xu, Xin
    Zheng, Xiangyi
    Xie, Liping
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2016, 6
  • [44] A systematic review and meta-analysis of familial prostate cancer risk
    Johns, LE
    Houlston, RS
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2003, 91 (09) : 789 - 794
  • [45] Lycopene and Risk of Prostate Cancer A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Chen, Ping
    Zhang, Wenhao
    Wang, Xiao
    Zhao, Keke
    Negi, Devendra Singh
    Zhuo, Li
    Qi, Mao
    Wang, Xinghuan
    Zhang, Xinhua
    MEDICINE, 2015, 94 (33)
  • [46] Prostate Cancer and Suicide Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Kim, Yun Jin
    Lee, Eun Ji
    Shim, Sung Ryul
    Kim, Jae Heon
    WORLD JOURNAL OF MENS HEALTH, 2025,
  • [47] Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Risk Calculators to Predict Prostate Cancer Risk
    Patel, Hiten D.
    Remmers, Sebastiaan
    Ellis, Jeffrey L.
    Li, Eric V.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    Fang, Andrew M.
    Davik, Petter
    Rais-Bahrami, Soroush
    Murphy, Adam B.
    Ross, Ashley E.
    Gupta, Gopal N.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2024, 7 (03) : E241516
  • [48] HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON OF COMMONLY USED INTERNATIONAL PROSTATE CANCER RISK CALCULATORS FOR PROSTATE BIOPSY
    Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno
    Verbeek, Jan
    Nieboer, Daan
    Steyerberg, Ewout
    Roobol, Monique
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (04): : E1026 - E1026
  • [49] The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators indicating a positive prostate biopsy: a comparison
    van den Bergh, Roderick C. N.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    Wolters, Tineke
    van Leeuwen, Pim J.
    Schroder, Fritz H.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2008, 102 (09) : 1068 - 1073
  • [50] Can Western Based Online Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators Be Used to Predict Prostate Cancer after Prostate Biopsy for the Korean Population?
    Lee, Dong Hoon
    Jung, Ha Bum
    Park, Jae Won
    Kim, Kyu Hyun
    Kim, Jongchan
    Lee, Seung Hwan
    Chung, Byung Ha
    YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 54 (03) : 665 - 671