Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Cancer

Date Submitted: May 13, 2021
Date Accepted: Jul 28, 2021

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators for Healthy Populations: Systematic Review

Bandala-Jacques A, Castellanos Esquivel KD, Pérez-Hurtado F, Hernández-Silva C, Reynoso-Noverón N

Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators for Healthy Populations: Systematic Review

JMIR Cancer 2021;7(3):e30430

DOI: 10.2196/30430

PMID: 34477564

PMCID: 8449298

Prostate cancer risk calculators for healthy population: A systematic review

  • Antonio Bandala-Jacques; 
  • Kevin Daniel Castellanos Esquivel; 
  • Fernanda Pérez-Hurtado; 
  • Cristobal Hernández-Silva; 
  • Nancy Reynoso-Noverón

ABSTRACT

Background:

Screening for prostate cancer has long been a debated, complex topic. The use of risk calculators for prostate cancer is recommended for determining patients’ individual risk of cancer and the subsequent need for a prostate biopsy. These tools could lead to a better discrimination of patients in need of invasive diagnostic procedures and for optimized allocation of healthcare resources

Objective:

To systematically review available literature on current prostate cancer risk calculators’ performance in healthy population, by comparing the impact factor of individual items on different cohorts, and the models’ overall performance.

Methods:

We performed a systematic review of available prostate cancer risk calculators targeted at healthy population. We included studies published from January 2000 to March 2021 in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese or German. Two reviewers independently decided for or against inclusion based on abstracts. A third reviewer intervened in case of disagreements. From the selected titles, we extracted information regarding the purpose of the manuscript, the analyzed calculators, the population for which it was calibrated, the included risk factors, and the model’s overall accuracy.

Results:

We included a total of 18 calculators across 53 different manuscripts. The most commonly analyzed ones were they PCPT and ERSPC risk calculators, developed from North American and European cohorts, respectively. Both calculators provided high precision for the diagnosis of aggressive prostate cancer (AUC as high as 0.798 for PCPT and 0.91 for ERSPC). We found 9 calculators developed from scratch for specific populations, which reached diagnostic precisions as high as 0.938. The most commonly included risk factors in the calculators were age, PSA levels and digital rectal examination findings. Additional calculators included race and detailed personal and family history

Conclusions:

Both the PCPR and the ERSPC risk calculators have been successfully adapted for cohorts other than the ones they were originally created for with no loss of diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, designing calculators from scratch considering each population’s sociocultural differences has resulted in risk tools that can be well adapted to be valid in more patients. The best risk calculator for prostate cancer will be that which was has been calibrated for its intended population and can be easily reproduced and implemented Clinical Trial: CRD42021242110


 Citation

Please cite as:

Bandala-Jacques A, Castellanos Esquivel KD, Pérez-Hurtado F, Hernández-Silva C, Reynoso-Noverón N

Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators for Healthy Populations: Systematic Review

JMIR Cancer 2021;7(3):e30430

DOI: 10.2196/30430

PMID: 34477564

PMCID: 8449298

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.