• 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

前列腺癌风险评估(CAPRA)术前评分与术后评分(CAPRA-S):预测癌症进展的能力及根治性前列腺切除术后辅助治疗的决策制定。

Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) Preoperative Score Versus Postoperative Score (CAPRA-S): ability to predict cancer progression and decision-making regarding adjuvant therapy after radical prostatectomy.

作者信息

Seo Won Ik, Kang Pil Moon, Kang Dong Il, Yoon Jang Ho, Kim Wansuk, Chung Jae Il

机构信息

Department of Urology, Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Busan, Korea.

出版信息

J Korean Med Sci. 2014 Sep;29(9):1212-6. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2014.29.9.1212. Epub 2014 Sep 2.

DOI:10.3346/jkms.2014.29.9.1212
PMID:25246738
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4168173/
Abstract

The University of California, San Francisco, announced in 2011 Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical (CAPRA-S) score which included pathologic data, but there were no results for comparing preoperative predictors with the CAPRA-S score. We evaluated the validation of the CAPRA-S score in our institution and compare the result with the preoperative progression predictor, CAPRA score. Data of 130 patients were reviewed who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer from 2008 to 2013. Performance of CAPRA-S score in predicting progression free probabilities was assessed through Kaplan Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression test. Additionally, prediction probability was compared with preoperative CAPRA score by logistic regression analysis. Comparing CAPRA score, the CAPRA-S score showed improved prediction ability for 5 yr progression free survival (concordance index 0.80, P = 0.04). After risk group stratification, 3 group model of CAPRA-S was superior than 3 group model of CAPRA for 3-yr progression free survival and 5-yr progression free survival (concordance index 0.74 vs. 0.70, 0.77 vs. 0.71, P < 0.001). Finally the CAPRA-S score was the more ideal predictor concerned with adjuvant therapy than the CAPRA score through decision curve analysis. The CPARA-S score is a useful predictor for disease progression after radical prostatectomy.

摘要

加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校于2011年公布了前列腺癌术后风险评估(CAPRA-S)评分,该评分纳入了病理数据,但尚无将术前预测指标与CAPRA-S评分进行比较的结果。我们评估了CAPRA-S评分在本机构中的有效性,并将结果与术前进展预测指标CAPRA评分进行比较。回顾了2008年至2013年期间130例行局限性前列腺癌根治性前列腺切除术患者的数据。通过Kaplan Meier分析和Cox比例风险回归测试评估CAPRA-S评分预测无进展概率的性能。此外,通过逻辑回归分析将预测概率与术前CAPRA评分进行比较。与CAPRA评分相比,CAPRA-S评分在预测5年无进展生存率方面显示出更高的预测能力(一致性指数0.80,P = 0.04)。在进行风险组分层后,CAPRA-S的3组模型在3年无进展生存率和5年无进展生存率方面优于CAPRA的3组模型(一致性指数分别为0.74对0.70、0.77对0.71,P < 0.001)。最后,通过决策曲线分析,CAPRA-S评分比CAPRA评分更适合作为辅助治疗的预测指标。CAPRA-S评分是根治性前列腺切除术后疾病进展的有效预测指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/af6e/4168173/3a9936766e70/jkms-29-1212-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/af6e/4168173/449fc262d62a/jkms-29-1212-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/af6e/4168173/3a9936766e70/jkms-29-1212-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/af6e/4168173/449fc262d62a/jkms-29-1212-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/af6e/4168173/3a9936766e70/jkms-29-1212-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) Preoperative Score Versus Postoperative Score (CAPRA-S): ability to predict cancer progression and decision-making regarding adjuvant therapy after radical prostatectomy.前列腺癌风险评估(CAPRA)术前评分与术后评分(CAPRA-S):预测癌症进展的能力及根治性前列腺切除术后辅助治疗的决策制定。
J Korean Med Sci. 2014 Sep;29(9):1212-6. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2014.29.9.1212. Epub 2014 Sep 2.
2
Multi-institutional validation of the CAPRA-S score to predict disease recurrence and mortality after radical prostatectomy.多机构验证 CAPRA-S 评分在预测根治性前列腺切除术后疾病复发和死亡中的作用。
Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1171-7. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.058. Epub 2013 Apr 8.
3
Combined value of validated clinical and genomic risk stratification tools for predicting prostate cancer mortality in a high-risk prostatectomy cohort.用于预测高危前列腺切除队列中前列腺癌死亡率的经验证的临床和基因组风险分层工具的综合价值。
Eur Urol. 2015 Feb;67(2):326-33. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.05.039. Epub 2014 Jul 2.
4
Evaluation of biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy by cancer of the prostate risk assessment post-surgical (CAPRA-S) score.通过前列腺癌术后风险评估(CAPRA-S)评分评估根治性前列腺切除术后无生化复发生存率。
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(6):2527-30. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.6.2527.
5
Validity of the CAPRA score to predict biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy. Results from a european multicenter survey of 1,296 patients.CAPRA评分预测根治性前列腺切除术后无生化复发生存率的有效性。来自欧洲1296例患者的多中心调查结果。
J Urol. 2007 Nov;178(5):1957-62; discussion 1962. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.07.043. Epub 2007 Sep 17.
6
Australian validation of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical score to predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.澳大利亚对前列腺癌风险评估术后评分进行验证,以预测根治性前列腺切除术后的生化复发情况。
ANZ J Surg. 2018 Mar;88(3):E183-E188. doi: 10.1111/ans.13954. Epub 2017 May 4.
7
External validation of University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score.加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校前列腺癌风险评估分数的外部验证
Urology. 2008 Aug;72(2):396-400. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.165. Epub 2008 Apr 18.
8
Comparison of MRI-Based Staging and Pathologic Staging for Predicting Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy.基于 MRI 的分期与病理分期预测前列腺癌根治术后生化复发的比较。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2023 Dec;221(6):773-787. doi: 10.2214/AJR.23.29609. Epub 2023 Jul 5.
9
External validation of the cancer of the prostate risk assessment (CAPRA) score in a single-surgeon radical prostatectomy series.单外科医生根治性前列腺切除术系列中前列腺癌风险评估 (CAPRA) 评分的外部验证。
Urol Oncol. 2012 Sep;30(5):584-9. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.06.007. Epub 2010 Sep 6.
10
Accuracy of CAPRA-S Score for Predicting Long-Term Biochemical Progression After Radical Prostatectomy.CAPRA-S 评分预测前列腺癌根治术后长期生化进展的准确性。
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2019 Jun;17(3):e645-e649. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.03.014. Epub 2019 Mar 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Novel Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Deep Learning and Clinical Parameter Integration for the Prediction of Long-Term Biochemical Recurrence-Free Survival in Prostate Cancer after Radical Prostatectomy.基于新型多参数磁共振成像的深度学习与临床参数整合用于预测前列腺癌根治术后长期无生化复发生存情况
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jun 29;15(13):3416. doi: 10.3390/cancers15133416.
2
Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect patient pathological outcome? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort.前列腺癌根治术的手术延迟会影响患者的病理结果吗?来自加拿大队列的回顾性分析。
Can Urol Assoc J. 2017 Aug;11(8):265-269. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.4149.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Predictive value of the cancer of the prostate risk assessment score for recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy in Korea: a single-surgeon series.韩国前列腺癌风险评估评分对根治性前列腺切除术后无复发生存的预测价值:单术者系列研究
Korean J Urol. 2014 May;55(5):321-6. doi: 10.4111/kju.2014.55.5.321. Epub 2014 May 12.
2
Korean prostate cancer patients have worse disease characteristics than their American counterparts.韩国前列腺癌患者的疾病特征比美国患者更差。
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(11):6913-7. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.11.6913.
3
External validation of the cancer of the prostate risk assessment-s score in koreans undergoing radical prostatectomy.
External Validation of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical Score for Prediction of Disease Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy.
前列腺癌术后风险评估评分对根治性前列腺切除术后疾病复发预测的外部验证
Adv Med. 2016;2016:8639041. doi: 10.1155/2016/8639041. Epub 2016 Oct 19.
4
F Fluorocholine Dynamic Time-of-Flight PET/MR Imaging in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Intermediate- to High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Initial Clinical-Pathologic Comparisons.F 氟胆碱动态飞行时间PET/MR成像在新诊断的中高危前列腺癌患者中的应用:初步临床病理比较
Radiology. 2017 Feb;282(2):429-436. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016160220. Epub 2016 Aug 11.
5
Pathologic Outcomes in Men with Low-risk Prostate Cancer Who Are Potential Candidates for Contemporary, Active Surveillance Protocols.低风险前列腺癌男性患者的病理结果,这些患者是当代积极监测方案的潜在候选对象。
J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Jul;30(7):932-6. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2015.30.7.932. Epub 2015 Jun 10.
接受根治性前列腺切除术的韩国人中前列腺癌风险评估 - S评分的外部验证
Korean J Urol. 2013 Jul;54(7):433-6. doi: 10.4111/kju.2013.54.7.433. Epub 2013 Jul 15.
4
Multi-institutional validation of the CAPRA-S score to predict disease recurrence and mortality after radical prostatectomy.多机构验证 CAPRA-S 评分在预测根治性前列腺切除术后疾病复发和死亡中的作用。
Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1171-7. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.058. Epub 2013 Apr 8.
5
Phase 3 study of adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait and see in pT3 prostate cancer: impact of pathology review on analysis.pT3 期前列腺癌辅助放疗与观察等待的 3 期研究:病理复查对分析的影响。
Eur Urol. 2013 Aug;64(2):193-8. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.029. Epub 2013 Mar 17.
6
Risk assessment of metastatic recurrence in patients with prostate cancer by using the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: results from 2937 European patients.应用前列腺癌风险评估评分预测前列腺癌患者转移复发风险:来自 2937 例欧洲患者的研究结果。
BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11):1714-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11147.x. Epub 2012 Apr 23.
7
External validation of the UCSF-CAPRA (University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment) in Japanese patients receiving radical prostatectomy.日本接受根治性前列腺切除术的患者中 UCSF-CAPRA(加州大学旧金山分校前列腺癌风险评估)的外部验证。
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2011 Nov;41(11):1259-64. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyr136. Epub 2011 Sep 22.
8
The natural history of metastatic progression in men with prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up.根治性前列腺切除术后 PSA 复发的男性中转移性进展的自然史:长期随访。
BJU Int. 2012 Jan;109(1):32-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10422.x. Epub 2011 Jul 20.
9
The CAPRA-S score: A straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy.CAPRA-S 评分:一种用于改善根治性前列腺切除术预后预测的简单工具。
Cancer. 2011 Nov 15;117(22):5039-46. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26169. Epub 2011 Jun 3.
10
External validation of the cancer of the prostate risk assessment (CAPRA) score in a single-surgeon radical prostatectomy series.单外科医生根治性前列腺切除术系列中前列腺癌风险评估 (CAPRA) 评分的外部验证。
Urol Oncol. 2012 Sep;30(5):584-9. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.06.007. Epub 2010 Sep 6.