Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33159431›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2020

Comparison of biopsy under-sampling and annual progression using hidden markov models to learn from prostate cancer active surveillance studies.

Weiyu Li, Brian T Denton, Daan Nieboer, Peter R Carroll, Monique J Roobol, Todd M Morgan, Movember Foundation’s Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) consortium

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The prognostic value ofFrontiers in oncology · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Weiyu LiDepartment of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7325-3506
Brian T DentonDepartment of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6372-6066
Daan NieboerDepartment of Urology, Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4403-6537
Peter R CarrollDepartment of Urology, UCSF - Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Monique J RoobolDepartment of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6967-1708
Todd M MorganDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1140-0603
Movember Foundation’s Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) consortium
University of Michigan · USErasmus MC · NLUCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to estimate the rates of biopsy undersampling and progression for four prostate cancer (PCa) active surveillance (AS) cohorts within the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) consortium. We used a hidden Markov model (HMM) to estimate factors that define PCa dynamics for men on AS including biopsy under-sampling and progression that are implied by longitudinal data in four large cohorts included in the GAP3 database. The HMM was subsequently used as the basis for a simulation model to evaluate the biopsy strategies previously proposed for each of these cohorts. For the four AS cohorts, the estimated annual progression rate was between 6%-13%. The estimated probability of a biopsy successfully sampling undiagnosed non-favorable risk cancer (biopsy sensitivity) was between 71% and 80%. In the simulation study of patients diagnosed with favorable risk cancer at age 50, the mean number of biopsies performed before age 75 was between 4.11 and 12.60, depending on the biopsy strategy. The mean delay time to detection of non-favorable risk cancer was between 0.38 and 2.17 years. Biopsy undersampling and progression varied considerably across study cohorts. There was no single best biopsy protocol that is optimal for all cohorts, because of the variation in biopsy under-sampling error and annual progression rates across cohorts. All strategies demonstrated diminishing benefits from additional biopsies.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsyCohort StudiesDatabases, FactualDisease ProgressionEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalNeoplasm GradingProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsRisk AssessmentWatchful WaitingProstate-Specific Antigenactive surveillancebiopsybiopsy under-samplingcancer progressionhidden Markov modelprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID33159431
PMCPMC7774732
OpenAlexW3095350149

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.