Cargando…
Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer
In this study, we performed a comprehensive estimation and assessment for the clinical value of prostate health index (PHI) in diagnosing prostate cancer. Using the bivariate mixed‐effect model, we calculated the following parameters and their 95% confidence internals (CIs), including sensitivity, s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6718540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31313500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2376 |
_version_ | 1783447740282306560 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Guangying Li, Yanyan Li, Chao Li, Na Li, Zhanzhan Zhou, Qin |
author_facet | Zhang, Guangying Li, Yanyan Li, Chao Li, Na Li, Zhanzhan Zhou, Qin |
author_sort | Zhang, Guangying |
collection | PubMed |
description | In this study, we performed a comprehensive estimation and assessment for the clinical value of prostate health index (PHI) in diagnosing prostate cancer. Using the bivariate mixed‐effect model, we calculated the following parameters and their 95% confidence internals (CIs), including sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio and symmetric receiver operator characteristic. Twenty eligible studies with a total number of 5543 subjects were included in the final analysis. The estimated sensitivity was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70‐0.79) and the specificity was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.58‐0.83). The pooled area under the curve was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74‐0.81). The combined positive likelihood ratio was 2.45 (95% CI: 2.19‐2.73) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.36 (95% CI: 0.31‐0.43). The diagnostic odds ratio was 6.73 (95% CI: 5.38‐8.44). The posttest probability was 40% under the present positive likelihood ratio of 2.45. It seems there was no significant difference between Asian population and Caucasian population population in sensitivity and specificity. But the overlap of AUC 95% CI indicated that the diagnostic accuracy of PHI was slightly higher in the Asian population population setting than that in the Caucasian population population population (0.83 vs 0.76). Similarly, there was also overlap in AUC 95% CI, which suggested that sample size may be one of heterogeneity source. The PHI has a moderate diagnostic accuracy for detecting prostate cancer. The discrimination ability of PHI is slightly prior to free/total prostate‐specific antigen. It seems that ethnicity has an influence on the clinical value of PHI in the diagnostic of prostate cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6718540 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67185402019-09-06 Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer Zhang, Guangying Li, Yanyan Li, Chao Li, Na Li, Zhanzhan Zhou, Qin Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research In this study, we performed a comprehensive estimation and assessment for the clinical value of prostate health index (PHI) in diagnosing prostate cancer. Using the bivariate mixed‐effect model, we calculated the following parameters and their 95% confidence internals (CIs), including sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio and symmetric receiver operator characteristic. Twenty eligible studies with a total number of 5543 subjects were included in the final analysis. The estimated sensitivity was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70‐0.79) and the specificity was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.58‐0.83). The pooled area under the curve was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74‐0.81). The combined positive likelihood ratio was 2.45 (95% CI: 2.19‐2.73) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.36 (95% CI: 0.31‐0.43). The diagnostic odds ratio was 6.73 (95% CI: 5.38‐8.44). The posttest probability was 40% under the present positive likelihood ratio of 2.45. It seems there was no significant difference between Asian population and Caucasian population population in sensitivity and specificity. But the overlap of AUC 95% CI indicated that the diagnostic accuracy of PHI was slightly higher in the Asian population population setting than that in the Caucasian population population population (0.83 vs 0.76). Similarly, there was also overlap in AUC 95% CI, which suggested that sample size may be one of heterogeneity source. The PHI has a moderate diagnostic accuracy for detecting prostate cancer. The discrimination ability of PHI is slightly prior to free/total prostate‐specific antigen. It seems that ethnicity has an influence on the clinical value of PHI in the diagnostic of prostate cancer. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-07-17 /pmc/articles/PMC6718540/ /pubmed/31313500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2376 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Zhang, Guangying Li, Yanyan Li, Chao Li, Na Li, Zhanzhan Zhou, Qin Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
title | Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
title_full | Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
title_fullStr | Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
title_short | Assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
title_sort | assessment on clinical value of prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6718540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31313500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2376 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangguangying assessmentonclinicalvalueofprostatehealthindexinthediagnosisofprostatecancer AT liyanyan assessmentonclinicalvalueofprostatehealthindexinthediagnosisofprostatecancer AT lichao assessmentonclinicalvalueofprostatehealthindexinthediagnosisofprostatecancer AT lina assessmentonclinicalvalueofprostatehealthindexinthediagnosisofprostatecancer AT lizhanzhan assessmentonclinicalvalueofprostatehealthindexinthediagnosisofprostatecancer AT zhouqin assessmentonclinicalvalueofprostatehealthindexinthediagnosisofprostatecancer |