ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2013
Evaluation of prediction models for the staging of prostate cancer.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Diagnostic Performance of the Length of Tumor Capsular Contact on MRI for Detecting Prostate Cancer Extraprostatic Extension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Korean journal of radiology · 2020Pooled it
- Extracapsular extension risk assessment using an artificial intelligence prostate cancer mapping algorithm.BJUI compass · 2024Article
- Diagnostic performance of prediction models for extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Insights into imaging · 2023Review
- A Novel Risk Calculator Incorporating Clinical Parameters, Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography for Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification Before Transperineal Prostate Biopsy.European urology open science · 2023Article
- Value of machine learning-based transrectal multimodal ultrasound combined with PSA-related indicators in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Integrating Serum Biomarkers into Prediction Models for Biochemical Recurrence Following Radical Prostatectomy.Cancers · 2021Article
- Biosensors Designed for Clinical Applications.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- A Decision Aide for the Risk Stratification of GU Cancer Patients at Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection, COVID-19 Related Hospitalization, Intubation, and Mortality.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- A risk calculator to inform the need for a prostate biopsy: a rapid access clinic cohort.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Application of Artificial Intelligence/Machine Vision & Learning for the Development of a Live Single-cell Phenotypic Biomarker Test to Predict Prostate Cancer Tumor Aggressiveness.Reviews in urology · 2020Article
- Accurate and rapid screening model for potential diabetes mellitus.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Article
- Integrating biomarkers across omic platforms: an approach to improve stratification of patients with indolent and aggressive prostate cancer.Molecular oncology · 2018Article
- Prediction of Low Birth Weight Delivery by Maternal Status and Its Validation: Decision Curve Analysis.International journal of preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Using the weighted area under the net benefit curve for decision curve analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Article
- Long-term outcomes of nonpalpable prostate cancer (T1c) patients treated with radical prostatectomy.Prostate international · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere are dilemmas associated with the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer which has lead to over diagnosis and over treatment. Prediction tools have been developed to assist the treatment of the disease.
methodsA retrospective review was performed of the Irish Prostate Cancer Research Consortium database and 603 patients were used in the study. Statistical models based on routinely used clinical variables were built using logistic regression, random forests and k nearest neighbours to predict prostate cancer stage. The predictive ability of the models was examined using discrimination metrics, calibration curves and clinical relevance, explored using decision curve analysis. The N = 603 patients were then applied to the 2007 Partin table to compare the predictions from the current gold standard in staging prediction to the models developed in this study.
results30% of the study cohort had non organ-confined disease. The model built using logistic regression illustrated the highest discrimination metrics (AUC = 0.622, Sens = 0.647, Spec = 0.601), best calibration and the most clinical relevance based on decision curve analysis. This model also achieved higher discrimination than the 2007 Partin table (ECE AUC = 0.572 & 0.509 for T1c and T2a respectively). However, even the best statistical model does not accurately predict prostate cancer stage.
conclusionsThis study has illustrated the inability of the current clinical variables and the 2007 Partin table to accurately predict prostate cancer stage. New biomarker features are urgently required to address the problem clinician's face in identifying the most appropriate treatment for their patients. This paper also demonstrated a concise methodological approach to evaluate novel features or prediction models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.