• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

根治性前列腺切除术后预测临床失败的模型比较。

Comparison of models to predict clinical failure after radical prostatectomy.

作者信息

Eggener Scott E, Vickers Andrew J, Serio Angel M, Donovan Michael J, Khan Faisal M, Bayer-Zubek Valentina, Verbel David, Cordon-Cardo Carlos, Reuter Victor E, Bianco Fernando J, Scardino Peter T

机构信息

Section of Urology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

Cancer. 2009 Jan 15;115(2):303-10. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24016.

DOI:10.1002/cncr.24016
PMID:19025977
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2740715/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Models are available to accurately predict biochemical disease recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Because not all patients experiencing BCR will progress to metastatic disease, it is appealing to determine postoperatively which patients are likely to manifest systemic disease.

METHODS

The study cohort consisted of 881 patients undergoing RP between 1985 and 2003. Clinical failure (CF) was defined as metastases, a rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in a castrate state, or death from prostate cancer. The cohort was randomized into training and validation sets. The accuracy of 4 models to predict clinical outcome within 5 years of RP were compared: 'postoperative BCR nomogram' and 'Cox regression CF model' based on standard clinical and pathologic parameters, and 2 CF 'systems pathology' models that integrate clinical and pathologic parameters with quantitative histomorphometric and immunofluorescent biomarker features ('systems pathology Models 1 and 2').

RESULTS

When applied to the validation set, the concordance index for the postoperative BCR nomogram was 0.85, for the Cox regression CF model 0.84, for systems pathology Model 1 0.81, and for systems pathology Model 2 0.85.

CONCLUSIONS

Models predicting either BCR or CF after RP exhibit similarly high levels of accuracy because standard clinical and pathologic variables appear to be the primary determinants of both outcomes. It is possible that introducing current or novel biomarkers found to be uniquely associated with disease progression may further enhance the accuracy of the systems pathology-based platform.

摘要

背景

现有模型可准确预测根治性前列腺切除术后的生化疾病复发(BCR)。由于并非所有经历BCR的患者都会进展为转移性疾病,因此确定术后哪些患者可能出现全身性疾病很有吸引力。

方法

研究队列包括1985年至2003年间接受根治性前列腺切除术的881例患者。临床失败(CF)定义为转移、去势状态下前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)升高或前列腺癌死亡。该队列被随机分为训练集和验证集。比较了4种模型预测根治性前列腺切除术后5年内临床结局的准确性:基于标准临床和病理参数的“术后BCR列线图”和“Cox回归CF模型”,以及2种将临床和病理参数与定量组织形态计量学和免疫荧光生物标志物特征相结合的CF“系统病理学”模型(“系统病理学模型1和2”)。

结果

应用于验证集时,术后BCR列线图的一致性指数为0.85,Cox回归CF模型为0.84,系统病理学模型1为0.81,系统病理学模型2为0.85。

结论

预测根治性前列腺切除术后BCR或CF的模型表现出相似的高准确性,因为标准临床和病理变量似乎是这两种结局的主要决定因素。引入目前发现的或新的与疾病进展独特相关的生物标志物可能会进一步提高基于系统病理学的平台的准确性。

相似文献

1
Comparison of models to predict clinical failure after radical prostatectomy.根治性前列腺切除术后预测临床失败的模型比较。
Cancer. 2009 Jan 15;115(2):303-10. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24016.
2
Nomogram Predicting Prostate Cancer-specific Mortality for Men with Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy.预测前列腺癌根治术后生化复发男性前列腺癌特异性死亡率的列线图
Eur Urol. 2015 Jun;67(6):1160-1167. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.019. Epub 2014 Oct 6.
3
Prediction of outcome following early salvage radiotherapy among patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.根治性前列腺切除术后生化复发患者早期挽救性放疗后结局的预测。
Eur Urol. 2014 Sep;66(3):479-86. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.045. Epub 2013 Dec 12.
4
Systems pathology approach for the prediction of prostate cancer progression after radical prostatectomy.根治性前列腺切除术后前列腺癌进展预测的系统病理学方法
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Aug 20;26(24):3923-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.3155.
5
Postoperative prostate-specific antigen nadir improves accuracy for predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) and Duke Prostate Center databases.术后前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)最低值可提高根治性前列腺切除术后预测生化复发的准确性:来自共享平等获取区域癌症医院(SEARCH)和杜克前列腺中心数据库的结果。
Int J Urol. 2010 Nov;17(11):914-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02631.x. Epub 2010 Sep 30.
6
Risk Stratification of Patients Candidate to Radical Prostatectomy Based on Clinical and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters: Development and External Validation of Novel Risk Groups.基于临床和多参数磁共振成像参数对前列腺癌根治术候选患者进行风险分层:新型风险组的开发与外部验证
Eur Urol. 2022 Feb;81(2):193-203. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.07.027. Epub 2021 Aug 13.
7
A nomogram predicting long-term biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.一种预测根治性前列腺切除术后长期生化复发的列线图。
Cancer. 2008 Mar 15;112(6):1254-63. doi: 10.1002/cncr.23293.
8
Are biochemical recurrence outcomes similar after radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy? Analysis of prostate cancer-specific mortality by nomogram-predicted risks of biochemical recurrence.根治性前列腺切除术和放疗后生化复发结局是否相似?基于列线图预测生化复发风险的前列腺癌特异性死亡率分析。
Eur Urol. 2015 Feb;67(2):204-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.017. Epub 2014 Oct 5.
9
Clinical evaluation of a novel method for the measurement of prostate-specific antigen, AccuPSA(TM) , as a predictor of 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy: results of a pilot study.一种新型前列腺特异性抗原检测方法 AccuPSA(TM) 的临床评估,作为预测根治性前列腺切除术后 5 年生化无复发生存率的指标:一项初步研究结果。
BJU Int. 2012 Jun;109(12):1770-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10568.x. Epub 2011 Oct 12.
10
The CPC Risk Calculator: A New App to Predict Prostate-specific Antigen Recurrence During Follow-up After Radical Prostatectomy.CPC 风险计算器:一种新的应用程序,可预测根治性前列腺切除术后随访期间前列腺特异性抗原复发的风险。
Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Apr;4(3):360-368. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.11.014. Epub 2016 Dec 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Does Subclassification of Pathologically Organ Confined (pT2) Prostate Cancer Provide Prognostic Discrimination of Outcomes after Radical Prostatectomy?病理性局限(pT2)前列腺癌的亚分类是否能为根治性前列腺切除术后的结局提供预后区分?
J Urol. 2018 Jun;199(6):1502-1509. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.056. Epub 2018 Jan 4.
2
Prostate Cancer: Utility of Whole-Lesion Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Metrics for Prediction of Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy.前列腺癌:全病灶表观扩散系数指标在预测前列腺癌根治术后生化复发中的应用
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Dec;205(6):1208-14. doi: 10.2214/AJR.15.14482.
3
Genome-wide detection of allelic genetic variation to predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy among prostate cancer patients using an exome SNP chip.使用外显子单核苷酸多态性芯片对前列腺癌患者进行全基因组等位基因遗传变异检测,以预测根治性前列腺切除术后的生化复发情况。
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2015 Aug;141(8):1493-501. doi: 10.1007/s00432-015-1947-9. Epub 2015 Mar 13.
4
New Prognostic Markers: The Pathway from Research to Clinical Practice.新的预后标志物:从研究到临床实践的途径。
Grand rounds Urol. 2009 Aug;8(3):7-13.
5
Prostate cancer: Could sensitive PSA assays expedite salvage radiotherapy?前列腺癌:灵敏的前列腺特异性抗原检测能否加快挽救性放疗?
Nat Rev Urol. 2014 Jan;11(1):14-5. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2013.276. Epub 2013 Dec 3.
6
Postoperative prostate-specific antigen nadir improves accuracy for predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) and Duke Prostate Center databases.术后前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)最低值可提高根治性前列腺切除术后预测生化复发的准确性:来自共享平等获取区域癌症医院(SEARCH)和杜克前列腺中心数据库的结果。
Int J Urol. 2010 Nov;17(11):914-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02631.x. Epub 2010 Sep 30.
7
Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy predict prostate cancer specific mortality.根治性前列腺切除术后的阳性切缘可预测前列腺癌特异性死亡率。
J Urol. 2010 Jun;183(6):2213-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.02.017.
8
Reporting performance of prognostic models in cancer: a review.报告癌症预后模型的性能:综述。
BMC Med. 2010 Mar 30;8:21. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-21.
9
Re-calibration and external validation of an existing nomogram to predict aggressive recurrences after radical prostatectomy.重新校准和外部验证现有的列线图,以预测根治性前列腺切除术后的侵袭性复发。
BJU Int. 2010 Jun;105(12):1654-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09060.x. Epub 2009 Nov 13.

本文引用的文献

1
Improved prediction of prostate cancer recurrence through systems pathology.通过系统病理学改善前列腺癌复发的预测
J Clin Invest. 2007 Jul;117(7):1876-83. doi: 10.1172/JCI31399.
2
Preoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.预测前列腺癌根治术后10年复发概率的术前列线图。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 May 17;98(10):715-7. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj190.
3
When and how to use informatics tools in caring for urologic patients.在护理泌尿外科患者时何时以及如何使用信息学工具。
Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2005 Apr;2(4):183-90. doi: 10.1038/ncpuro0144.
4
Postoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.预测前列腺癌根治术后10年复发概率的术后列线图。
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 1;23(28):7005-12. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.867.
5
Prostate-specific antigen nadir and cancer-specific mortality following hormonal therapy for prostate-specific antigen failure.前列腺特异性抗原失败后接受激素治疗的前列腺特异性抗原最低点与癌症特异性死亡率
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Sep 20;23(27):6556-60. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.20.966.
6
Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.根治性前列腺切除术后生化复发后前列腺癌特异性死亡风险。
JAMA. 2005 Jul 27;294(4):433-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.4.433.
7
Integration of gene expression profiling and clinical variables to predict prostate carcinoma recurrence after radical prostatectomy.整合基因表达谱与临床变量以预测前列腺癌根治术后复发情况。
Cancer. 2005 Jul 15;104(2):290-8. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21157.
8
Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results.3478例连续性患者接受耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术后的癌症进展和生存率:长期结果
J Urol. 2004 Sep;172(3):910-4. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000134888.22332.bb.
9
Preoperative PSA velocity and the risk of death from prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.术前前列腺特异抗原(PSA)变化率与根治性前列腺切除术后前列腺癌死亡风险
N Engl J Med. 2004 Jul 8;351(2):125-35. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032975.
10
Validation of increasing prostate specific antigen as a predictor of prostate cancer death after treatment of localized prostate cancer with surgery or radiation.前列腺特异性抗原升高作为局限性前列腺癌手术或放疗后前列腺癌死亡预测指标的验证。
J Urol. 2004 Jun;171(6 Pt 1):2221-5. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000124381.93689.b4.