Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28046017›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Development and External Validation of the Korean Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator for High-Grade Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Two Western Risk Calculators in an Asian Cohort.

Jae Young Park, Sungroh Yoon, Man Sik Park, Hoon Choi, Jae Hyun Bae, Du Geon Moon, Sung Kyu Hong, Sang Eun Lee, Chanwang Park, Seok-Soo Byun

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jae Young ParkDepartment of Urology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6664-6846
Sungroh YoonDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Man Sik ParkDepartment of Statistics, College of Natural Sciences, Sungshin Women's University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hoon ChoiDepartment of Urology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Republic of Korea.
Jae Hyun BaeDepartment of Urology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Du Geon MoonDepartment of Urology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Sung Kyu HongDepartment of Urology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Sang Eun LeeDepartment of Urology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Chanwang ParkAnesthesia Consultants of Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America.
Seok-Soo ByunDepartment of Urology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Korea University · KRSeoul National University · KROphthalmology Consultants · USSungshin Women's University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe developed the Korean Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator for High-Grade Prostate Cancer (KPCRC-HG) that predicts the probability of prostate cancer (PC) of Gleason score 7 or higher at the initial prostate biopsy in a Korean cohort (http://acl.snu.ac.kr/PCRC/RISC/). In addition, KPCRC-HG was validated and compared with internet-based Western risk calculators in a validation cohort. MATERIALS AND

methodsUsing a logistic regression model, KPCRC-HG was developed based on the data from 602 previously unscreened Korean men who underwent initial prostate biopsies. Using 2,313 cases in a validation cohort, KPCRC-HG was compared with the European Randomized Study of Screening for PC Risk Calculator for high-grade cancer (ERSPCRC-HG) and the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0 for high-grade cancer (PCPTRC-HG). The predictive accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and calibration plots.

resultsPC was detected in 172 (28.6%) men, 120 (19.9%) of whom had PC of Gleason score 7 or higher. Independent predictors included prostate-specific antigen levels, digital rectal examination findings, transrectal ultrasound findings, and prostate volume. The AUC of the KPCRC-HG (0.84) was higher than that of the PCPTRC-HG (0.79, p<0.001) but not different from that of the ERSPCRC-HG (0.83) on external validation. Calibration plots also revealed better performance of KPCRC-HG and ERSPCRC-HG than that of PCPTRC-HG on external validation. At a cut-off of 5% for KPCRC-HG, 253 of the 2,313 men (11%) would not have been biopsied, and 14 of the 614 PC cases with Gleason score 7 or higher (2%) would not have been diagnosed.

conclusionsKPCRC-HG is the first web-based high-grade prostate cancer prediction model in Korea. It had higher predictive accuracy than PCPTRC-HG in a Korean population and showed similar performance with ERSPCRC-HG in a Korean population. This prediction model could help avoid unnecessary biopsy and reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment in clinical settings.

Indexed as

Risk AssessmentAgedArea Under CurveAsian PeopleBiopsyCalibrationCohort StudiesDigital Rectal ExaminationEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingProstateProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID28046017
PMCPMC5207506
OpenAlexW2569285501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.