uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Predicting Prostate Cancer Death with Different Pretreatment Risk Stratification Tools: A Head-to-head Comparison in a Nationwide Cohort Study
Karolinska Inst, Dept Med Solna, Clin Epidemiol Div, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kings Coll London, Div Canc Studies, TOUR, London, England;Akad Sjukhuset, Reg Canc Ctr, Uppsala, Sweden.
Univ Turin, Dept Med Sci, Canc Epidemiol Unit, Turin, Italy;CPO Piemonte, Turin, Italy.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Urology.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8306-0687
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: European Urology, ISSN 0302-2838, E-ISSN 1873-7560, Vol. 77, no 2, p. 180-188Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Numerous pretreatment risk classification tools are available for prostate cancer. Which tool is best in predicting prostate cancer death is unclear.

Objective: To systematically compare the prognostic performance of the most commonly used pretreatment risk stratification tools for prostate cancer.

Design, setting, and participants: A nationwide cohort study was conducted, including 154 811 men in Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) 4.0 diagnosed with nonmetastatic prostate cancer during 1998-2016 and followed through 2016.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We compared the D'Amico, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), European Association of Urology (EAU), Genito-Urinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada (GUROC), American Urological Association (AUA), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and Cambridge Prognostic Groups (CPG) risk group systems; the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score; and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) nomogram in predicting prostate cancer death by estimating the concordance index (C-index) and the observed versus predicted cumulative incidences at different follow-up times.

Results and limitations: A total of 139 515 men were included in the main analysis, of whom 15 961 died from prostate cancer during follow-up. The C-index at 10 yr of follow-up ranged from 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.73) to 0.81 (95% CI: 0.80-0.81) across the compared tools. The MSKCC nomogram (C-index: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.80-0.81), CAPRA score (C-index: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.79-0.81), and CPG system (C-index: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.78-0.79) performed the best. The order of performance between the tools remained in analyses stratified by primary treatment and year of diagnosis. The predicted cumulative incidences were close to the observed ones, with some underestimation at 5 yr. It is a limitation that the study was conducted solely in a Swedish setting (ie, case mix).

Conclusions: The MSKCC nomogram, CAPRA score, and CPG risk grouping system performed better in discriminating prostate cancer death than the D'Amico and D'Amico-derived systems (NICE, GUROC, EAU, AUA, and NCCN). Use of these tools may improve clinical decision making.

Patient summary: There are numerous pretreatment risk classification tools that can aid treatment decision for prostate cancer. We systematically compared the prognostic performance of the most commonly used tools in a large cohort of Swedish men with prostate cancer. The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score, and Cambridge Prognostic Groups performed best in predicting prostate cancer death. The use of these tools may improve treatment decisions. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER , 2020. Vol. 77, no 2, p. 180-188
Keywords [en]
Pretreatment risk stratification, Prognostic model, Prostate cancer
National Category
Urology and Nephrology Cancer and Oncology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-405337DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.09.027ISI: 000507362200009PubMedID: 31606332OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-405337DiVA, id: diva2:1411602
Funder
Swedish Cancer Society, 2011/825Stockholm County CouncilAvailable from: 2020-03-04 Created: 2020-03-04 Last updated: 2020-03-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Stattin, Pär

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Stattin, PärRichiardi, Lorenzo
By organisation
Urology
In the same journal
European Urology
Urology and NephrologyCancer and Oncology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf