4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prostate Health Index Density Outperforms Prostate Health Index in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is considered neither sensitive nor specific for prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to compare total PSA (tPSA), percentage of free PSA (%fPSA), the PSA density (PSAD), Prostate Health Index (PHI), and the PHI density (PHID) to see which one could best predict clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa): a potentially lethal disease.

          Methods

          A total of 412 men with PSA of 2–20 ng/mL were prospectively included. Serum biomarkers for PCa was collected before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. PHI was calculated by the formula: (p2PSA/fPSA) x √tPSA. PHID was calculated as PHI divided by prostate volume measured by transrectal ultrasound.

          Results

          Of the 412 men, 134 (32.5%) and 94(22.8%) were diagnosed with PCa and csPCa, respectively. We used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analyses (DCA) to compare the performance of PSA related parameters, PHI and PHID in diagnosing csPCa. AUC for tPSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA, PSAD, PHI and PHID were 0.56、0.63、0.76、0.74、0.77 and 0.82 respectively for csPCa detection. In the univariate analysis, the prostate volume, tPSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA, PHI, PSAD, and PHID were all significantly associated with csPCa, and PHID was the most important predictor (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.15–1.72). Besides, The AUC of PHID was significantly larger than PHI in csPCa diagnosis ( p=0.004). At 90% sensitivity, PHID had the highest specificity (54.1%) for csPCa and could reduce the most unnecessary biopsies (43.7%) and miss the fewest csPCa (8.5%) when PHID ≥ 0.67. In addition to AUC, DCA re-confirmed the clinical benefit of PHID over all PSA-related parameters and PHI in csPCa diagnosis. The PHID cut-off value was positively correlated with the csPCa ratio in the PHID risk table, which is useful for evaluating csPCa risk in a clinical setting.

          Conclusion

          The PHID is an excellent predictor of csPCa. The PHID risk table may be used in standard clinical practice to pre-select men at the highest risk of harboring csPCa.

          Related collections

          Most cited references60

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models.

          Diagnostic and prognostic models are typically evaluated with measures of accuracy that do not address clinical consequences. Decision-analytic techniques allow assessment of clinical outcomes but often require collection of additional information and may be cumbersome to apply to models that yield a continuous result. The authors sought a method for evaluating and comparing prediction models that incorporates clinical consequences,requires only the data set on which the models are tested,and can be applied to models that have either continuous or dichotomous results. The authors describe decision curve analysis, a simple, novel method of evaluating predictive models. They start by assuming that the threshold probability of a disease or event at which a patient would opt for treatment is informative of how the patient weighs the relative harms of a false-positive and a false-negative prediction. This theoretical relationship is then used to derive the net benefit of the model across different threshold probabilities. Plotting net benefit against threshold probability yields the "decision curve." The authors apply the method to models for the prediction of seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer patients. Decision curve analysis identified the range of threshold probabilities in which a model was of value, the magnitude of benefit, and which of several models was optimal. Decision curve analysis is a suitable method for evaluating alternative diagnostic and prognostic strategies that has advantages over other commonly used measures and techniques.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up

              The Lancet, 384(9959), 2027-2035
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Oncol
                Front Oncol
                Front. Oncol.
                Frontiers in Oncology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2234-943X
                19 November 2021
                2021
                : 11
                : 772182
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital , Taipei, Taiwan
                [2] 2 Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch , Hsinchu, Taiwan
                [3] 3 Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Far-Eastern Memorial Hospital , New Taipei City, Taiwan
                [4] 4 Graduate Program in Biomedical Informatics, College of Informatics, Yuan-Ze University , Chung-Li, Taiwan
                [5] 5 Department of Urology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Yuan-Shan/Su-Ao Branch , Yi-Lan, Taiwan
                [6] 6 Department of Medical Research and Education, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Yuan-Shan/Su-Ao Branch , Yi-Lan, Taiwan
                Author notes

                Edited by: Marco Borghesi, University of Genoa, Italy

                Reviewed by: Daniela Terracciano, University of Naples Federico II, Italy; Francesco Del Giudice, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy

                *Correspondence: Chih-Hung Chiang, guchiang@ 123456gmail.com ; Chao-Yuan Huang, cyh540909@ 123456gmail.com

                This article was submitted to Genitourinary Oncology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Oncology

                Article
                10.3389/fonc.2021.772182
                8640459
                34869007
                3aab43ac-ba1c-4767-a11b-729bba715082
                Copyright © 2021 Chiu, Cheng, Pu, Lu, Hong, Chung, Chiang and Huang

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 07 September 2021
                : 29 October 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 60, Pages: 9, Words: 4863
                Categories
                Oncology
                Original Research

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prostate health index density,risk table,clinically significant prostate cancer,save unnecessary prostate biopsy,predict lethal disease

                Comments

                Comment on this article