The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step)
Background. We have previously described an algorithm APhiGT (Age, Prostate Health index, Gleason score, TNM stage) for staging of prostate cancer (PC) before treatment. The algorithm was developed by logistic regression on an educational selection (ES) of 337 PC cases. The algorithm includes data a...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | Russian |
Published: |
ABV-press
2019-07-01
|
Series: | Onkourologiâ |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://oncourology.abvpress.ru/oncur/article/view/948 |
id |
doaj-a804d2b708fe4755934d63caf8d7841c |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a804d2b708fe4755934d63caf8d7841c2021-07-29T08:41:44ZrusABV-pressOnkourologiâ 1726-97761996-18122019-07-01152425210.17650/1726-9776-2019-15-2-42-52844The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step)N. S. Sergeeva0T. E. Skachkova1N. V. Marshutina2K. M. Nushko3I. M. Shevchuk4M. R. Nazirov5S. A. Pirogov6E. F. Yurkov7V. G. Gitis8B. Ya. Alekseev9A. D. Kaprin10P.A. Hertzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of Russia; N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of RussiaP.A. Hertzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaP.A. Hertzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaP.A. Hertzen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaN.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaN.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaInstitute for Information Transmission Problems (Kharkevich Institute), Russian Academy of SciencesInstitute for Information Transmission Problems (Kharkevich Institute), Russian Academy of SciencesInstitute for Information Transmission Problems (Kharkevich Institute), Russian Academy of SciencesNational Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaNational Medical Research Radiological Center, Ministry of Health of RussiaBackground. We have previously described an algorithm APhiGT (Age, Prostate Health index, Gleason score, TNM stage) for staging of prostate cancer (PC) before treatment. The algorithm was developed by logistic regression on an educational selection (ES) of 337 PC cases. The algorithm includes data about the age of patients, the levels of total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, [-2]proPSA and the ranked data of the Gleason score (by biopsy results) and T (by TNM).Objective. Validation of APhiGT on the validation selection (VS) of 83 PC cases was carried out in this work.Materials and methods. ROC analysis was performed in ES and VS.Results and сonclusion. It is established that area under the curve (AUC), characterizing the ability to divide clinically significant subgroups of patients (Gleason score <7 vs. Gleason score ≥7, рТ2 vs. рТ3, localized indolent PC vs. localized aggressive PC) for APhiGT both in ES and VS was significantly higher than AUC for total PSA, %[-2]proPSA in free PSA and prostate health index. At the same time, in all clinical subgroups of patients AUC for VS was lower than AUC for ES, which may be due to a significantly smaller size of VS compared to ES.https://oncourology.abvpress.ru/oncur/article/view/948prostate cancerstaging before treatmentaphigt algorithmvalidation |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
Russian |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
N. S. Sergeeva T. E. Skachkova N. V. Marshutina K. M. Nushko I. M. Shevchuk M. R. Nazirov S. A. Pirogov E. F. Yurkov V. G. Gitis B. Ya. Alekseev A. D. Kaprin |
spellingShingle |
N. S. Sergeeva T. E. Skachkova N. V. Marshutina K. M. Nushko I. M. Shevchuk M. R. Nazirov S. A. Pirogov E. F. Yurkov V. G. Gitis B. Ya. Alekseev A. D. Kaprin The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) Onkourologiâ prostate cancer staging before treatment aphigt algorithm validation |
author_facet |
N. S. Sergeeva T. E. Skachkova N. V. Marshutina K. M. Nushko I. M. Shevchuk M. R. Nazirov S. A. Pirogov E. F. Yurkov V. G. Gitis B. Ya. Alekseev A. D. Kaprin |
author_sort |
N. S. Sergeeva |
title |
The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) |
title_short |
The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) |
title_full |
The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) |
title_fullStr |
The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) |
title_full_unstemmed |
The validation results for APhiGT algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) |
title_sort |
validation results for aphigt algorithm for clarification of prostate cancer staging before treatment (first step) |
publisher |
ABV-press |
series |
Onkourologiâ |
issn |
1726-9776 1996-1812 |
publishDate |
2019-07-01 |
description |
Background. We have previously described an algorithm APhiGT (Age, Prostate Health index, Gleason score, TNM stage) for staging of prostate cancer (PC) before treatment. The algorithm was developed by logistic regression on an educational selection (ES) of 337 PC cases. The algorithm includes data about the age of patients, the levels of total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, [-2]proPSA and the ranked data of the Gleason score (by biopsy results) and T (by TNM).Objective. Validation of APhiGT on the validation selection (VS) of 83 PC cases was carried out in this work.Materials and methods. ROC analysis was performed in ES and VS.Results and сonclusion. It is established that area under the curve (AUC), characterizing the ability to divide clinically significant subgroups of patients (Gleason score <7 vs. Gleason score ≥7, рТ2 vs. рТ3, localized indolent PC vs. localized aggressive PC) for APhiGT both in ES and VS was significantly higher than AUC for total PSA, %[-2]proPSA in free PSA and prostate health index. At the same time, in all clinical subgroups of patients AUC for VS was lower than AUC for ES, which may be due to a significantly smaller size of VS compared to ES. |
topic |
prostate cancer staging before treatment aphigt algorithm validation |
url |
https://oncourology.abvpress.ru/oncur/article/view/948 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT nssergeeva thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT teskachkova thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT nvmarshutina thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT kmnushko thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT imshevchuk thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT mrnazirov thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT sapirogov thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT efyurkov thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT vggitis thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT byaalekseev thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT adkaprin thevalidationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT nssergeeva validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT teskachkova validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT nvmarshutina validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT kmnushko validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT imshevchuk validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT mrnazirov validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT sapirogov validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT efyurkov validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT vggitis validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT byaalekseev validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep AT adkaprin validationresultsforaphigtalgorithmforclarificationofprostatecancerstagingbeforetreatmentfirststep |
_version_ |
1721252503505338368 |