Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30880374›Full record

ArticleHealth care management science2020

Decision models for distinguishing between clinically insignificant and significant tumors in prostate cancer biopsies: an application of Bayes' Theorem to reduce costs and improve outcomes.

Arthur J Swersey, John Colberg, Ronald Evans, Michael W Kattan, Johannes Ledolter, Rodney Parker

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care management science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Arthur J SwerseyYale School of Management, Box 208200, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA. arthur.swersey@yale.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8513-9789
John ColbergDepartment of Urology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, CT, USA.
Ronald EvansPrognos, New York, NY, USA.
Michael W KattanCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Johannes LedolterHenry B. Tippie College of Business, University of Iowa, Iowa, IA, USA.
Rodney ParkerIndiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Yale University · USCleveland Clinic · USIndiana University Bloomington · USUniversity of Iowa · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of death from cancer, behind lung cancer, for men in the U. S, with nearly 30,000 deaths per year. A key problem is the difficulty in distinguishing, after biopsy, between significant cancers that should be treated immediately and clinically insignificant tumors that should be monitored by active surveillance. Prostate cancer has been over-treated; a recent European randomized screening trial shows overtreatment rates of 40%. Overtreatment of insignificant tumors reduces quality of life, while delayed treatment of significant cancers increases the incidence of metastatic disease and death. We develop a decision analysis approach based on simulation and probability modeling. For a given prostate volume and number of biopsy needles, our rule is to treat if total length of cancer in needle cores exceeds c, the cutoff value, with active surveillance otherwise, provided pathology is favorable. We determine the optimal cutoff value, c*. There are two misclassification costs: treating a minimal tumor and not treating a small or medium tumor (large tumors were never misclassified in our simulations). Bayes' Theorem is used to predict the probabilities of minimal, small, medium, and large cancers given the total length of cancer found in biopsy cores. A 20 needle biopsy in conjunction with our new decision analysis approach significantly reduces the expected loss associated with a patient in our target population about to undergo a biopsy. Longer needles reduce expected loss. Increasing the number of biopsy cores from the current norm of 10-12 to about 20, in conjunction with our new decision model, should substantially improve the ability to distinguish minimal from significant prostate cancer by minimizing the expected loss from over-treating minimal tumors and delaying treatment of significant cancers.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesBayes TheoremBiopsy, NeedleComputer SimulationHumansMaleProbabilityProstateProstatic NeoplasmsBayes’ theoremDecision analysisProstate biopsySimulation

Identifiers

PMID30880374
OpenAlexW2921401197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.