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
. 2022 Mar;54(2):e14329.
doi: 10.1111/and.14329. Epub 2021 Nov 27.

An analysis of three different prostate cancer risk calculators applied prior to prostate biopsy: A Turkish cohort validation study

Mehmet Yıldızhan  1 , Melih Balcı  1 , Unsal Eroğlu  1 , Erem Asil  1 , Seref Coser  1 , Ali Yasin Özercan  1 , Burak Köseoğlu  1 , Ozer Güzel  1 , Ahmet Asfuroğlu  2 , Altuğ Tuncel  3
Affiliations

An analysis of three different prostate cancer risk calculators applied prior to prostate biopsy: A Turkish cohort validation study

Mehmet Yıldızhan et al. Andrologia. 2022 Mar.

Abstract

The study aimed to investigate the best-performing of three risk calculators (RCs) for the Turkish population in predicting cancer-free status and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. The electronic medical records of 527 patients who underwent prostate biopsy for the first time due to PSA of 0.3-50 ng/dl and/or cancer suspicion at digital rectal examination (DRE) between January 2017 and December 2020 were retrieved retrospectively. The predictive power of the RCs in the biopsy and the surgical cohort was calculated by two urologists using European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) RC, the North American Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial-RC (PCPT-RC), and the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG)-RC. All three RCs were successful in predicting PCa and high-risk disease at ROC analysis (p < 0.0001). Of these three nomograms, PBCG-RC outperformed PCPT-RC 2.0 and ERSPC-RH in predicting benign pathology outcomes at biopsy. A better performance of PBCG-RC was also observed in terms of prediction of high-risk disease at biopsy. Using any of the available RCs prior to biopsy is of greater assistance to prostate-specific antigen and DRE than examination alone. The study results show that PBCG-RC performed before biopsy has a higher predictive power than the other two RCs.

Keywords: prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; risk calculator; transrectal ultrasonography.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Adam, A., Hellig, J. C., Perera, M., Bolton, D., & Lawrentschuk, N. (2018). ‘Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator’ mobile applications (Apps): A systematic review and scoring using the validated user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS). World Journal of Urology, 36(4), 565-573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2150-1
    1. Ankerst, D. P., Hoefler, J., Bock, S., Goodman, P. J., Vickers, A., Hernandez, J., Sokoll, L. J., Sanda, M. G., Wei, J. T., Leach, R. J., & Thompson, I. M. (2014). Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator 2.0 for the prediction of low- vs high-grade prostate cancer. Urology, 83(6), 1362-1367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.035
    1. Ankerst, D. P., Straubinger, J., Selig, K., Guerrios, L., De Hoedt, A., Hernandez, J., Liss, M. A., Leach, R. J., Freedland, S. J., Kattan, M. W., Nam, R., Haese, A., Montorsi, F., Boorjian, S. A., Cooperberg, M. R., Poyet, C., Vertosick, E., & Vickers, A. J. (2018). A contemporary prostate biopsy risk calculator based on multiple heterogeneous cohorts. European Urology, 74(2), 197-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.05.003
    1. Auprich, M., Bjartell, A., Chun, F.-H., de la Taille, A., Freedland, S. J., Haese, A., Schalken, J., Stenzl, A., Tombal, B., & van der Poel, H. (2011). Contemporary role of prostate cancer antigen 3 in the management of prostate cancer. European Urology, 60(5), 1045-1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.08.003
    1. Carbunaru, S., Nettey, O. S., Gogana, P., Helenowski, I. B., Jovanovic, B., Ruden, M., Hollowell, C. M. P., Sharifi, R., Kittles, R. A., Schaeffer, E., Gann, P., & Murphy, A. B. (2019). A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort. BMC Urology, 19(1), 121. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0553-6

Substances