» Articles » PMID: 31230029

Models Predicting Survival to Guide Treatment Decision-making in Newly Diagnosed Primary Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer: a Systematic Review

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2019 Jun 24
PMID 31230029
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Men diagnosed with non-metastatic prostate cancer require standardised and robust long-term prognostic information to help them decide on management. Most currently-used tools use short-term and surrogate outcomes. We explored the evidence base in the literature on available pre-treatment, prognostic models built around long-term survival and assess the accuracy, generalisability and clinical availability of these models.

Design: Systematic literature review, pre-specified and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018086394).

Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 through February 2018, using previously-tested search terms.

Eligibility Criteria: Inclusion required a multivariable model prognostic model for non-metastatic prostate cancer, using long-term survival data (defined as ≥5 years), which was not treatment-specific and usable at the point of diagnosis.

Data Extraction And Synthesis: Title, abstract and full-text screening were sequentially performed by three reviewers. Data extraction was performed for items in the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies checklist. Individual studies were assessed using the new Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool.

Results: Database searches yielded 6581 studies after deduplication. Twelve studies were included in the final review. Nine were model development studies using data from over 231 888 men. However, only six of the nine studies included any conservatively managed cases and only three of the nine included treatment as a predictor variable. Every included study had at least one parameter for which there was high risk of bias, with failure to report accuracy, and inadequate reporting of missing data common failings. Three external validation studies were included, reporting two available models: The University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score and the Cambridge Prognostic Groups. Neither included treatment effect, and both had potential flaws in design, but represent the most robust and usable prognostic models currently available.

Conclusion: Few long-term prognostic models exist to inform decision-making at diagnosis of non-metastatic prostate cancer. Improved models are required to inform management and avoid undertreatment and overtreatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer.

Citing Articles

The efficacy of different biomarkers and endpoints to refine referrals for suspected prostate cancer: the TARGET study (Tiered integrAted tests for eaRly diaGnosis of clinically significant ProstatE Tumours).

Lophatananon A, Muir K, Gnanapragasam V BMC Med. 2024; 22(1):440.

PMID: 39379935 PMC: 11462681. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-024-03667-7.


Analysis of the Gene Networks and Pathways Correlated with Tissue Differentiation in Prostate Cancer.

Filippi A, Aurelian J, Mocanu M Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(7).

PMID: 38612439 PMC: 11011430. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25073626.


Cohort profile: the Turin prostate cancer prognostication (TPCP) cohort.

Destefanis N, Fiano V, Milani L, Vasapolli P, Fiorentino M, Giunchi F Front Oncol. 2023; 13:1242639.

PMID: 37869094 PMC: 10587560. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1242639.


An Actionable Expert-System Algorithm to Support Nurse-Led Cancer Survivorship Care: Algorithm Development Study.

Pfisterer K, Lohani R, Janes E, Ng D, Wang D, Bryant-Lukosius D JMIR Cancer. 2023; 9:e44332.

PMID: 37792435 PMC: 10585445. DOI: 10.2196/44332.


Assessing the impact of MRI based diagnostics on pre-treatment disease classification and prognostic model performance in men diagnosed with new prostate cancer from an unscreened population.

Lophatananon A, Byrne M, Barrett T, Warren A, Muir K, Dokubo I BMC Cancer. 2022; 22(1):878.

PMID: 35953766 PMC: 9367076. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09955-w.


References
1.
Jhaveri F, Zippe C, Klein E, Kupelian P . Biochemical failure does not predict overall survival after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: 10-year results. Urology. 1999; 54(5):884-90. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00252-6. View

2.
Tewari A, Johnson C, Divine G, Crawford E, Gamito E, Demers R . Long-term survival probability in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: a case-control, propensity modeling study stratified by race, age, treatment and comorbidities. J Urol. 2004; 171(4):1513-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000117975.40782.95. View

3.
Moons K, Altman D, Vergouwe Y, Royston P . Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ. 2009; 338:b606. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b606. View

4.
Shariat S, Kattan M, Vickers A, Karakiewicz P, Scardino P . Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools. Future Oncol. 2009; 5(10):1555-84. PMC: 2933457. DOI: 10.2217/fon.09.121. View

5.
Stephenson A, Scardino P, Eastham J, Bianco Jr F, Dotan Z, Fearn P . Preoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98(10):715-7. PMC: 2242430. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djj190. View