Prediction models for prostate cancer to be used in the primary care setting: a systematic review

被引:25
作者
Aladwani, Mohammad [1 ]
Lophatananon, Artitaya [1 ]
Ollier, William [1 ,2 ]
Muir, Kenneth [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Sch Hlth Sci, Div Populat Hlth Hlth Serv Res & Primary Care, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester, Lancs, England
[2] Manchester Metropolitan Univ, Sch Healthcare Sci, Fac Sci & Engn, Manchester, Lancs, England
关键词
epidemiology; urology; prostate disease; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; DETECTION RESEARCH NETWORK; HEALTH INDEX; MULTICENTER EVALUATION; EXTERNAL VALIDATION; RISK CALCULATORS; AFRICAN-AMERICAN; NEURAL-NETWORK; SCREENING-TEST; ANTIGEN PSA;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034661
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective To identify risk prediction models for prostate cancer (PCa) that can be used in the primary care and community health settings. Design Systematic review. Data sources MEDLINE and Embase databases combined from inception and up to the end of January 2019. Eligibility Studies were included based on satisfying all the following criteria: (i) presenting an evaluation of PCa risk at initial biopsy in patients with no history of PCa, (ii) studies not incorporating an invasive clinical assessment or expensive biomarker/genetic tests, (iii) inclusion of at least two variables with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) being one of them, and (iv) studies reporting a measure of predictive performance. The quality of the studies and risk of bias was assessed by using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). Data extraction and synthesis Relevant information extracted for each model included: the year of publication, source of data, type of model, number of patients, country, age, PSA range, mean/median PSA, other variables included in the model, number of biopsy cores to assess outcomes, study endpoint(s), cancer detection, model validation and model performance. Results An initial search yielded 109 potential studies, of which five met the set criteria. Four studies were cohort-based and one was a case-control study. PCa detection rate was between 20.6% and 55.8%. Area under the curve (AUC) was reported in four studies and ranged from 0.65 to 0.75. All models showed significant improvement in predicting PCa compared with being based on PSA alone. The difference in AUC between extended models and PSA alone was between 0.06 and 0.21. Conclusion Only a few PCa risk prediction models have the potential to be readily used in the primary healthcare or community health setting. Further studies are needed to investigate other potential variables that could be integrated into models to improve their clinical utility for PCa testing in a community setting.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 94 条
[61]   How to develop a more accurate risk prediction model when there are few events [J].
Pavlou, Menelaos ;
Ambler, Gareth ;
Seaman, Shaun R. ;
Guttmann, Oliver ;
Elliott, Perry ;
King, Michael ;
Omar, Rumana Z. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2015, 351
[62]   Head-to-head comparison of prostate cancer risk calculators predicting biopsy outcome [J].
Pereira-Azevedo, Nuno ;
Verbeek, Jan F. M. ;
Nieboer, Daan ;
Bangma, Chris H. ;
Roobol, Monique J. .
TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2018, 7 (01) :18-+
[63]   Prostate specific antigen: A decade of discovery - What we have learned and where we are going [J].
Polascik, TJ ;
Oesterling, JE ;
Partin, AW .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1999, 162 (02) :293-306
[64]   Model to predict prostate biopsy outcome in large screening population with independent validation in referral setting [J].
Porter, CR ;
Gamito, EJ ;
Crawford, ED ;
Bartsch, G ;
Presti, JC ;
Tewari, A ;
O'Donnell, C .
UROLOGY, 2005, 65 (05) :937-941
[65]   Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy in a racially diverse population: A prospective study [J].
Porter, CR ;
O'Donnell, C ;
Crawford, ED ;
Gamito, EJ ;
Sentizimary, B ;
De Rosalia, A ;
Tewari, A .
UROLOGY, 2002, 60 (05) :831-835
[66]  
Prostate Cancer UK, 2016, CONS STAT PSA TEST A
[67]  
Romero Frederico R., 2008, Archivos Espanoles de Urologia, V61, P759
[68]   Is Prostate Cancer Screening Bad or Good? Summary of a Debate at the Innovation in Urology Meeting, September 17-19, 2010, Milan, Italy [J].
Roobol, Monique J. .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2011, 59 (03) :359-362
[69]  
Ross Phillip L, 2002, Semin Urol Oncol, V20, P82, DOI 10.1053/suro.2002.32490
[70]  
Ross PL, 2001, J UROLOGY, V165, P1562, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66349-5