Development and validation of a predictive model for determining clinically significant prostate cancer in men with negative magnetic resonance imaging after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy

被引:5
|
作者
Liu, Gang [1 ]
Zhu, Yuze [1 ]
Yao, Zichuan [2 ]
Jiang, Yunzhong [2 ]
Wu, Bin [1 ]
Bai, Song [1 ]
机构
[1] China Med Univ, Dept Urol, Shengjing Hosp, 36 SanHao St, Shenyang 110004, Liaoning, Peoples R China
[2] China Med Univ, Dept Radiol, Shengjing Hosp, Shenyang, Peoples R China
来源
PROSTATE | 2021年 / 81卷 / 13期
关键词
biopsy; negative MRI; nomogram; prostate cancer; URINARY-TRACT SYMPTOMS; ANTIGEN PSA DENSITY; DIAGNOSTIC-ACCURACY; HYPERPLASIA; ASSOCIATION; GUIDELINES; MRI;
D O I
10.1002/pros.24193
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background The interpretation of negative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening results for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (International Society of Urological Pathology grade >= group 2) is debatable and poses a clinical dilemma for urologists. No nomograms have been developed to predict csPCa in such populations. In this study, we aimed to develop and validate a model for predicting the probability of csPCa in men with negative MRI (PI-RADS score 1-2) results after transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy. Methods The development cohort consisted of 728 patients with negative MRI results who underwent subsequent prostate biopsy at our center between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2017. The patients' clinicopathologic data were recorded. The Lasso regression was used for data dimension reduction and feature selection, then multivariable binary logistic regression was used to build a predictive model with regression coefficients. The model was validated in an independent cohort of 334 consecutive patients from January 1, 2018 and June 30, 2020. The performance of the predictive model was assessed with respect to discrimination, calibration, and decision curve analysis. Results The predictors incorporated in this model included age, history of previous negative prostate biopsy, prostate specific antigen density (PSAD), and lower urinary tract symptoms, with PSAD being the strongest predictor. The model showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.875 (95% confidence interval, 0.816-0.933) and good calibration (unreliability test, p = .540). Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the model was clinically useful. Conclusion This study presents a good nomogram that can aid pre-biopsy risk stratification for the detection of csPCa, and that may help inform biopsy decisions in patients with negative MRI results.
引用
收藏
页码:983 / 991
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Magnetic Resonance - Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy
    Argun, Omer Burak
    Obek, Can
    Kural, Ali Riza
    UROONKOLOJI BULTENI-BULLETIN OF UROONCOLOGY, 2016, 15 (02): : 76 - 79
  • [22] Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus combined magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion and systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection in routine clinical practice
    Bae, Jae Heung
    Kim, See Hyung
    ULTRASONOGRAPHY, 2020, 39 (02) : 137 - 143
  • [23] Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Prostate Biopsy in Patients with ≥ One Negative Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Lan, Hailong
    Zhou, Yanling
    Lin, Guisen
    Zhao, Hua
    Wu, Guantu
    CANCER INVESTIGATION, 2022, 40 (09) : 789 - 798
  • [24] Transient impotence after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy
    Akyol, Ilker
    Adayener, Cuneyt
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ULTRASOUND, 2008, 36 (01) : 33 - 34
  • [25] Current status of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer
    Raja, J
    Ramachandran, N
    Munneke, G
    Patel, U
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2006, 61 (02) : 142 - 153
  • [26] Predictors of prostate cancer on repeat transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy
    Park, SJ
    Miyake, H
    Hara, I
    Eto, H
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 10 (02) : 68 - 71
  • [27] Risk of Prostate Cancer after a Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Biopsy
    Kinnaird, Adam
    Sharma, Vidit
    Chuang, Ryan
    Priester, Alan
    Tran, Elizabeth
    Barsa, Danielle E.
    Delfin, Merdie
    Kwan, Lorna
    Sisk, Anthony
    Felker, Ely
    Marks, Leonard S.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 204 (06): : 1180 - 1186
  • [28] Reasons for missing clinically significant prostate cancer by targeted magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy
    Klingebiel, M.
    Arsov, C.
    Ullrich, T.
    Quentin, M.
    Al-Monajjed, R.
    Mally, D.
    Sawicki, L. M.
    Hiester, A.
    Esposito, I
    Albers, P.
    Antoch, G.
    Schimmoeller, L.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2021, 137
  • [29] COMPARISON OF MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-FUSION BIOPSY AND STANDARD TRANSRECTAL ULTRASOUND BIOPSY : CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION RATE
    Byun, Hye Jin
    Jung, Wonho
    Ha, Ji Yong
    Kim, Byung Hoon
    Park, Chol Hee
    Kim, Chun Il
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04): : E516 - E516
  • [30] Editorial Comment: Environmental Impact of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy
    Leapman, Michael S.
    Thiel, Cassandra L.
    Gordon, Ilyssa
    Nolte, Adam C.
    Perecman, Aaron
    Loeb, Stacy
    Overcash, Michael
    Sherman, Jodi
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2023, 49 (03): : 383 - 385