Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Nov 15;117(22):5039-46.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.26169. Epub 2011 Jun 3.

The CAPRA-S score: A straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy

Matthew R Cooperberg  1 , Joan F Hilton, Peter R Carroll
Affiliations

The CAPRA-S score: A straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy

Matthew R Cooperberg et al. Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: The authors previously developed and validated the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score to predict prostate cancer recurrence based on pretreatment clinical data. They aimed to develop a similar postsurgical score with improved accuracy via incorporation of pathologic data.

Methods: A total of 3837 prostatectomy patients in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE™) national disease registry were analyzed. Cox regression was used to determine the predictive power of preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA), pathologic Gleason score (pGS), surgical margins (SM), extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and lymph node invasion (LNI). Points were assigned based on the relative weights of these variables in predicting recurrence. The new postsurgical score (CAPRA-S) was tested and compared with a commonly cited nomogram with proportional hazards analysis, concordance (c) index, calibration plots, and decision-curve analysis.

Results: Recurrence appeared in 16.8% of the men; actuarial progression-free probability at 5 years was 78.0%. The CAPRA-S was determined by adding up to 3 points for PSA, up to 3 points for pGS, 1 point each for ECE and LNI, and 2 points each for SM and SVI. The hazard ratio for each point increase in CAPRA-S score was 1.54 (95% confidence interval, 1.49-1.59), indicating a 2.4-fold increase in risk for each 2-point increase in score. The CAPRA-S c-index was 0.77, substantially higher than 0.66 for the pretreatment CAPRA score and comparable to 0.76 for the nomogram. The CAPRA-S score performed better in both calibration and decision curve analyses.

Conclusions: The CAPRA-S offers good discriminatory accuracy, calibration, and ease of calculation for clinical and research settings.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The CAPRA-S score. Points are assigned for each variable: up to 3 for prostate specific antigen (PSA) level in ng/ml, up to 3 for pathologic Gleason score, 2 each for positive surgical margin (SM) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and 1 each for extracapsular extension (ECE) and lymph node invasion (LNI). Points are summed to yield the CAPRA-S score.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A. Biochemical progression-free probability following radical prostatectomy, stratified by CAPRA-S score. B. Biochemical progression-free probability following radical prostatectomy, stratified by grouped CAPRA-S score: 0–2 indicates relatively low-risk, 3–5 intermediate-risk, and ≥6 high-risk disease in terms of likelihood of biochemical progression.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A. Biochemical progression-free probability following radical prostatectomy, stratified by CAPRA-S score. B. Biochemical progression-free probability following radical prostatectomy, stratified by grouped CAPRA-S score: 0–2 indicates relatively low-risk, 3–5 intermediate-risk, and ≥6 high-risk disease in terms of likelihood of biochemical progression.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Decision curve analysis comparing CAPRA-S to postoperative nomogram. The solid blue line indicates the CAPRA-S score predictions, the dashed red line the nomogram predictions. Across the various threshold probabilities, CAPRA-S has greater net benefit (i.e., the net increase in the proportion of patients who would be appropriately identified for adjuvant treatment using the prediction model) than the nomogram. The gray line represents the assumption that all patients would recur, the black line that none would recur. The segment of the nomogram curve which falls below the gray line suggests suboptimal calibration—specifically, over-optimistic prediction—at low predicted levels of risk.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Calibration plot comparing observed (Kaplan-Meier estimates and 95% confidence intervals) with predicted (model-based) progression-free probabilities (PGP) at 5 years’ follow-up. The 45° reference line represents perfect calibration, and labels at each point indicate the score level assessed. Panel A: CAPRA-S, Panel B: Stephenson nomogram
Figure 4
Figure 4
Calibration plot comparing observed (Kaplan-Meier estimates and 95% confidence intervals) with predicted (model-based) progression-free probabilities (PGP) at 5 years’ follow-up. The 45° reference line represents perfect calibration, and labels at each point indicate the score level assessed. Panel A: CAPRA-S, Panel B: Stephenson nomogram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer Statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60:277–300. - PubMed
    1. Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, Litwin MS, Latini DM, Du Chane J, et al. The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;173(6):1938–42. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zhao KH, Hernandez DJ, Han M, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Partin AW. External validation of University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score. Urology. 2008;72(2):396–400. - PubMed
    1. Lughezzani G, Budaus L, Isbarn H, Sun M, Perrotte P, Haese A, et al. Head-to-head comparison of the three most commonly used preoperative models for prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;57:562–8. - PubMed
    1. Cooperberg MR, Freedland SJ, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, Presti JC, Jr, Amling CL, et al. Multiinstitutional validation of the UCSF cancer of the prostate risk assessment for prediction of recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2006;107(10):2384–91. - PubMed

Publication types