Development, validation, and head-to-head comparison of logistic regression-based nomograms and artificial neural network models predicting prostate cancer on initial extended biopsy

Predictive models before and after radical prostatectomy

CONTEXT

In the last 10 years, several user-friendly predictive tools have been developed to help clinicians in decision-making process before and after radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE

To review the most known and used predictive models in pre-operative and post-operative setting.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A structured, comprehensive literature review was performed using data retrieved from recent review articles, original articles, and abstracts. Used keywords were predictive models, nomograms, look-up tables, classification and regression-tree analysis, artificial neural networks, and radical prostatectomy.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A great amount of predictive models has been provided in oncology setting: nomograms, look-up tables, classification and regression-tree analysis, propensity scores, risk-group stratification models, and artificial neural networks. Pre-surgery predictive tools offer the opportunity of getting the most evidence-based and individualized selection of available treatment alternatives. Post-operative predictive models usually provide higher accuracy relative to the pre-surgery models.

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions and treatment should be tailored to each individual patient and to the specific characteristics of patients. A number of available predictive models represent a tool to provide accurate prediction of cancer natural history and to improve patients' care.

Internal validation of an artificial neural network for prostate biopsy outcome

OBJECTIVES

To carry out an internal validation of the retrospectively trained artificial neural network (ANN) 'ProstataClass'.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of 393 patients undergoing 8-12 core prostate biopsy was analyzed. Data of these patients were applied to the online available ANN 'ProstataClass' using the Elecsys total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA) and free PSA (fPSA) assays. Beside the internal validation of the ANN 'ProstataClass' an additional ANN (named as ANN internal validation: ANNiv) only using the 393 prospective patient data was evaluated. The new ANN model was constructed with the MATLAB Neural Network Toolbox. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves comparing the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) and specificities at 90% and 95% sensitivity.

RESULTS

Within a tPSA range of 1.0-22.8 ng/mL, 229 men (58.3%) had prostate cancer (PCa). tPSA, %fPSA and the number of positive digital rectal examinations (DRE) differed significantly from the cohort of patients of the ANN 'ProstataClass', whereas age and prostate volume were comparable. AUCs for tPSA, %fPSA and the ANN 'ProstataClass' were 0.527, 0.726 and 0.747 (P = 0.085 between %fPSA and ANN). The AUC of the ANNiv (0.754) was significantly better compared with %fPSA (P = 0.021), whereas the AUC of two ANN models built on external cohorts (0.726 and 0.729) showed no differences to %fPSA and the other ANN models.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences of DRE status and %fPSA medians decrease the power of the 'ProstataClass' ANN in the internal validation cohort. The effect of retrospective data evaluation the 'ProstataClass' cohort and prospective fPSA measurement may be responsible for %fPSA differences. All ANN models built with different PSA and fPSA assays performed equally if applied to the two cohorts.

Techniques and predictive models to improve prostate cancer detection

The use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a screening test remains controversial. There have been several attempts to refine PSA measurements to improve its predictive value. These modifications, including PSA density, PSA kinetics, and the measurement of PSA isoforms, have met with limited success. Therefore, complex statistical and computational models have been created to assess an individual's risk of prostate cancer more accurately. In this review, the authors examined the methods used to modify PSA as well as various predictive models used in prostate cancer detection. They described the mathematical underpinnings of these techniques along with their intrinsic strengths and weaknesses, and they assessed the accuracy of these methods, which have been shown to be better than physicians' judgment at predicting a man's risk of cancer. Without understanding the design and limitations of these methods, they can be applied inappropriately, leading to incorrect conclusions. These models are important components in counseling patients on their risk of prostate cancer and also help in the design of clinical trials by stratifying patients into different risk categories. Thus, it is incumbent on both clinicians and researchers to become familiar with these tools. Cancer 2009;115(13 suppl):3085-99. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.

The value of an artificial neural network in the decision-making for prostate biopsies

PURPOSE

In majority of patients who are subjected to prostate biopsies, no prostate cancer (PCa) is found. It is important to prevent unnecessary biopsies since serious complications may occur. An artificial neural network (ANN) may be able to predict the risk of the presence of PCa.

METHODS

Included were all patients, who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies between June 2006 and June 2007 with a total PSA (tPSA) level between 2 and 20 microg/l. The patients were divided into two groups according to their tPSA level (2-10 microg/l and 10-20 microg/l). The ANN Prostataclass of the Universitätsklinikum Charité in Berlin was used. The predictions of the ANN were compared to the pathology results of the biopsies.

RESULTS

Overall 165 patients were included. PCa was diagnosed in 53 patients, whereas the ANN predicted "no risk" in 19 of these patients (36%). The ANN output receiver operator characteristic (ROC) plots for the range of tPSA 2-10 microg/l and tPSA 10-20 microg/l showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 63 and 88% for the initial biopsy group, versus 69 and 57%, respectively, for the repeat biopsy group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ANN resulted in a false negative rate of 36%, missing PCa in 19 patients. For use in an outpatient-clinical setting, this ANN is insufficient to predict the risk of presence of PCa reliably.