Comparison between the European Randomized Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) risk calculators: Prediction of clinically significant Prostate Cancer risk in a cohort of patients from Argentina

P.M. Orbe Villota , J.A. Leiva Centeno , J. Lugones , P.G. Minuzzi , S.M. Varea
{"title":"Comparison between the European Randomized Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) risk calculators: Prediction of clinically significant Prostate Cancer risk in a cohort of patients from Argentina","authors":"P.M. Orbe Villota ,&nbsp;J.A. Leiva Centeno ,&nbsp;J. Lugones ,&nbsp;P.G. Minuzzi ,&nbsp;S.M. Varea","doi":"10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.10.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p><span>To compare the performance of the risk calculators of the European Randomized Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the </span>Prostate Biopsy<span> Collaborative Group (PBCG) in predicting the risk of presenting clinically significant prostate cancer.</span></p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Retrospectively, patients who underwent prostate biopsy at Sanatorio Allende Cerro, Ciudad de Córdoba, Argentina, were identified from January 2018 to December 2021. The probability of having prostate cancer was calculated with the two calculators separately and then the results were compared to establish which of the two performed better. For this, areas under the curve (AUC) were analyzed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>250 patients were included, 140 (56%) presented prostate cancer, of which 92 (65.71%) had clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥7). The patients who presented cancer were older, had a higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value, and had a smaller prostate size. The AUC to predict the probability of having clinically significant prostate cancer was 0.79 and 0.73 for PBCG-RC and ERSPC-RC respectively (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.0084).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this cohort of patients, both prostate cancer risk calculators performed well in predicting clinically significant prostate cancer risk, although the PBCG-RC showed better accuracy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94291,"journal":{"name":"Actas urologicas espanolas","volume":"48 3","pages":"Pages 210-217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Actas urologicas espanolas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173578623001130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To compare the performance of the risk calculators of the European Randomized Study for Screening of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) and the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) in predicting the risk of presenting clinically significant prostate cancer.

Material and methods

Retrospectively, patients who underwent prostate biopsy at Sanatorio Allende Cerro, Ciudad de Córdoba, Argentina, were identified from January 2018 to December 2021. The probability of having prostate cancer was calculated with the two calculators separately and then the results were compared to establish which of the two performed better. For this, areas under the curve (AUC) were analyzed.

Results

250 patients were included, 140 (56%) presented prostate cancer, of which 92 (65.71%) had clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score ≥7). The patients who presented cancer were older, had a higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value, and had a smaller prostate size. The AUC to predict the probability of having clinically significant prostate cancer was 0.79 and 0.73 for PBCG-RC and ERSPC-RC respectively (P = 0.0084).

Conclusion

In this cohort of patients, both prostate cancer risk calculators performed well in predicting clinically significant prostate cancer risk, although the PBCG-RC showed better accuracy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲癌症筛查随机研究(ERSPC)与前列腺活检协作组(PBCG)风险计算器的比较:阿根廷患者队列中具有临床意义的癌症风险预测。
目的:比较欧洲癌症筛查随机研究(ERSPC)和前列腺活检协作小组(PBCG)的风险计算器在预测临床显著前列腺癌症风险方面的性能。材料和方法:回顾性分析,2018年1月至2021年12月,在阿根廷科尔多瓦城Sanatorio Allende Cerro接受前列腺活检的患者。分别用两个计算器计算患前列腺癌症的概率,然后将结果进行比较,以确定两者中哪一个表现更好。为此,分析了曲线下面积(AUC)。结果:纳入患者250例,其中140例(56%)为前列腺癌,其中92例(65.71%)为有临床意义的癌症(Gleason评分≥7)。癌症患者年龄较大,前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)值较高,前列腺大小较小。PBCG-RC和ERSPC-RC预测具有临床意义的前列腺癌症概率的AUC分别为0.79和0.73(P = .0084)。结论:在这组患者中,两种前列腺癌症风险计算器在预测临床显著的前列腺癌症风险方面都表现良好,尽管PBCG-RC显示出更好的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What is the relationship between penile cancer and the microbiome? A scoping review Cumulative morbidity of ureteroscopy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma Recommendations on the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: Patient selection Consensus update on the therapeutic approach to patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity Quality of life following transobturator sling surgery for female stress urinary incontinence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1