Cargando…
A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort
BACKGROUND: Predictive models that take race into account like the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0 (PCPT RC) and the new Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) RC have been developed to equitably mitigate the overdiagnosis of prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening. Few st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6880480/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31771578 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0553-6 |
_version_ | 1783473766537363456 |
---|---|
author | Carbunaru, Samuel Nettey, Oluwarotimi S. Gogana, Pooja Helenowski, Irene B. Jovanovic, Borko Ruden, Maria Hollowell, Courtney M. P. Sharifi, Roohollah Kittles, Rick A. Schaeffer, Edward Gann, Peter Murphy, Adam B. |
author_facet | Carbunaru, Samuel Nettey, Oluwarotimi S. Gogana, Pooja Helenowski, Irene B. Jovanovic, Borko Ruden, Maria Hollowell, Courtney M. P. Sharifi, Roohollah Kittles, Rick A. Schaeffer, Edward Gann, Peter Murphy, Adam B. |
author_sort | Carbunaru, Samuel |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Predictive models that take race into account like the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0 (PCPT RC) and the new Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) RC have been developed to equitably mitigate the overdiagnosis of prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening. Few studies have compared the performance of both calculators across racial groups. METHODS: From 1485 prospectively recruited participants, 954 men were identified undergoing initial prostate biopsy for abnormal PSA or digital rectal examination in five Chicago hospitals between 2009 and 2014. Discrimination, calibration, and frequency of avoided biopsies were calculated to assess the performance of both risk calculators. RESULTS: Of 954 participants, 463 (48.5%) were Black, 355 (37.2%) were White, and 136 (14.2%) identified as Other. Biopsy results were as follows: 310 (32.5%) exhibited no cancer, 323 (33.9%) indolent prostate cancer, and 321 (33.6%) clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Differences in area under the curve (AUC)s for the detection of csPCa between PCPT and PBCG were not statistically different across all racial groups. PBCG did not improve calibration plots in Blacks and Others, as it showed higher levels of overprediction at most risk thresholds. PCPT led to an increased number of avoidable biopsies in minorities compared to PBCG at the 30% threshold (68% vs. 28% of all patients) with roughly similar rates of missed csPCa (23% vs. 20%). CONCLUSION: Significant improvements were noticed in PBCG’s calibrations and net benefits in Whites compared to PCPT. Since PBCG’s improvements in Blacks are disputable and potentially biases a greater number of low risk Black and Other men towards unnecessary biopsies, PCPT may lead to better biopsy decisions in racial minority groups. Further comparisons of commonly used risk calculators across racial groups is warranted to minimize excessive biopsies and overdiagnosis in ethnic minorities. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6880480 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68804802019-11-29 A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort Carbunaru, Samuel Nettey, Oluwarotimi S. Gogana, Pooja Helenowski, Irene B. Jovanovic, Borko Ruden, Maria Hollowell, Courtney M. P. Sharifi, Roohollah Kittles, Rick A. Schaeffer, Edward Gann, Peter Murphy, Adam B. BMC Urol Research Article BACKGROUND: Predictive models that take race into account like the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator 2.0 (PCPT RC) and the new Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) RC have been developed to equitably mitigate the overdiagnosis of prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening. Few studies have compared the performance of both calculators across racial groups. METHODS: From 1485 prospectively recruited participants, 954 men were identified undergoing initial prostate biopsy for abnormal PSA or digital rectal examination in five Chicago hospitals between 2009 and 2014. Discrimination, calibration, and frequency of avoided biopsies were calculated to assess the performance of both risk calculators. RESULTS: Of 954 participants, 463 (48.5%) were Black, 355 (37.2%) were White, and 136 (14.2%) identified as Other. Biopsy results were as follows: 310 (32.5%) exhibited no cancer, 323 (33.9%) indolent prostate cancer, and 321 (33.6%) clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Differences in area under the curve (AUC)s for the detection of csPCa between PCPT and PBCG were not statistically different across all racial groups. PBCG did not improve calibration plots in Blacks and Others, as it showed higher levels of overprediction at most risk thresholds. PCPT led to an increased number of avoidable biopsies in minorities compared to PBCG at the 30% threshold (68% vs. 28% of all patients) with roughly similar rates of missed csPCa (23% vs. 20%). CONCLUSION: Significant improvements were noticed in PBCG’s calibrations and net benefits in Whites compared to PCPT. Since PBCG’s improvements in Blacks are disputable and potentially biases a greater number of low risk Black and Other men towards unnecessary biopsies, PCPT may lead to better biopsy decisions in racial minority groups. Further comparisons of commonly used risk calculators across racial groups is warranted to minimize excessive biopsies and overdiagnosis in ethnic minorities. BioMed Central 2019-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6880480/ /pubmed/31771578 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0553-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Carbunaru, Samuel Nettey, Oluwarotimi S. Gogana, Pooja Helenowski, Irene B. Jovanovic, Borko Ruden, Maria Hollowell, Courtney M. P. Sharifi, Roohollah Kittles, Rick A. Schaeffer, Edward Gann, Peter Murphy, Adam B. A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
title | A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
title_full | A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
title_fullStr | A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
title_short | A comparative effectiveness analysis of the PBCG vs. PCPT risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
title_sort | comparative effectiveness analysis of the pbcg vs. pcpt risks calculators in a multi-ethnic cohort |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6880480/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31771578 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0553-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT carbunarusamuel acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT netteyoluwarotimis acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT goganapooja acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT helenowskiireneb acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT jovanovicborko acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT rudenmaria acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT hollowellcourtneymp acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT sharifiroohollah acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT kittlesricka acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT schaefferedward acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT gannpeter acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT murphyadamb acomparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT carbunarusamuel comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT netteyoluwarotimis comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT goganapooja comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT helenowskiireneb comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT jovanovicborko comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT rudenmaria comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT hollowellcourtneymp comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT sharifiroohollah comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT kittlesricka comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT schaefferedward comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT gannpeter comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort AT murphyadamb comparativeeffectivenessanalysisofthepbcgvspcptriskscalculatorsinamultiethniccohort |