The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy - PubMed (original) (raw)
The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy
Matthew R Cooperberg et al. J Urol. 2005 Jun.
Erratum in
- J Urol. 2006 Jun;175(6):2369
Abstract
Purpose: Multivariate prognostic instruments aim to predict risk of recurrence among patients with localized prostate cancer. We devised a novel risk assessment tool which would be a strong predictor of outcome across various levels of risk, and which could be easily applied and intuitively understood.
Materials and methods: We studied 1,439 men diagnosed between 1992 and 2001 who had undergone radical prostatectomy and were followed in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) database, a longitudinal, community based disease registry of patients with prostate cancer. Disease recurrence was defined as prostate specific antigen (PSA) 0.2 ng/ml or greater on 2 consecutive occasions following prostatectomy or a second cancer treatment more than 6 months after surgery. The University of California, San Francisco-Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (UCSF-CAPRA) score was developed using preoperative PSA, Gleason score, clinical T stage, biopsy results and age. The index was developed and validated using Cox proportional hazards and life table analyses.
Results: A total of 210 patients (15%) had recurrence, 145 by PSA criteria and 65 by second treatment. Based on the results of the Cox analysis, points were assigned based on PSA (0 to 4 points), Gleason score (0 to 3), T stage (0 to 1), age (0 to 1) and percent of biopsy positive cores (0 to 1). The UCSF-CAPRA score range is 0 to 10, with roughly double the risk of recurrence for each 2-point increase in score. Recurrence-free survival at 5 years ranged from 85% for a UCSF-CAPRA score of 0 to 1 (95% CI 73%-92%) to 8% for a score of 7 to 10 (95% CI 0%-28%). The concordance index for the UCSF-CAPRA score was 0.66.
Conclusions: The UCSF-CAPRA score is a straightforward yet powerful preoperative risk assessment tool. It must be externally validated in future studies.
Figures
Figure 1. 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival curves
Survival curves for 5-year recurrence-free survival among patients with each CAPRA score
Comment in
- Eliminating the current Bell curve to improve the results of radical prostatectomy.
Nelson JB. Nelson JB. J Urol. 2005 Jun;173(6):1848-9. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000163780.93013.6a. J Urol. 2005. PMID: 15879761 No abstract available.
Similar articles
- Validity of the CAPRA score to predict biochemical recurrence-free survival after radical prostatectomy. Results from a european multicenter survey of 1,296 patients.
May M, Knoll N, Siegsmund M, Fahlenkamp D, Vogler H, Hoschke B, Gralla O. May M, et al. J Urol. 2007 Nov;178(5):1957-62; discussion 1962. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.07.043. Epub 2007 Sep 17. J Urol. 2007. PMID: 17868719 Clinical Trial. - Multiinstitutional validation of the UCSF cancer of the prostate risk assessment for prediction of recurrence after radical prostatectomy.
Cooperberg MR, Freedland SJ, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP, Presti JC Jr, Amling CL, Terris MK, Aronson WJ, Kane CJ, Carroll PR. Cooperberg MR, et al. Cancer. 2006 Nov 15;107(10):2384-91. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22262. Cancer. 2006. PMID: 17039503 - External validation of University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score.
Zhao KH, Hernandez DJ, Han M, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, Partin AW. Zhao KH, et al. Urology. 2008 Aug;72(2):396-400. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.165. Epub 2008 Apr 18. Urology. 2008. PMID: 18372031 - Prognostic value of the CAPRA clinical prediction rule: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Meurs P, Galvin R, Fanning DM, Fahey T. Meurs P, et al. BJU Int. 2013 Mar;111(3):427-36. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11400.x. Epub 2012 Aug 9. BJU Int. 2013. PMID: 22882877 Review.
Cited by
- Enhancing risk stratification models in localized prostate cancer by novel validated tissue biomarkers.
Olah C, Mairinger F, Wessolly M, Joniau S, Spahn M, Kruithof-de Julio M, Hadaschik B, Soós A, Nyirády P, Győrffy B, Reis H, Szarvas T. Olah C, et al. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2024 Nov 14. doi: 10.1038/s41391-024-00918-9. Online ahead of print. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2024. PMID: 39543244 - Multi-task Bayesian model combining FDG-PET/CT imaging and clinical data for interpretable high-grade prostate cancer prognosis.
Larose M, Archambault L, Touma N, Brodeur R, Desroches F, Raymond N, Bédard-Tremblay D, LeBlanc D, Rasekh F, Hovington H, Neveu B, Vallières M, Pouliot F. Larose M, et al. Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 6;14(1):26928. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-77498-0. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 39505979 Free PMC article. - Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification in NRG Oncology Phase III Randomized Trials Using Multimodal Deep Learning With Digital Histopathology.
Tward JD, Huang HC, Esteva A, Mohamad O, van der Wal D, Simko JP, DeVries S, Zhang J, Joun S, Showalter TN, Schaeffer EM, Morgan TM, Monson JM, Wallace JA, Bahary JP, Sandler HM, Spratt DE, Rodgers JP, Feng FY, Tran PT. Tward JD, et al. JCO Precis Oncol. 2024 Oct;8:e2400145. doi: 10.1200/PO.24.00145. Epub 2024 Oct 24. JCO Precis Oncol. 2024. PMID: 39447096 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial. - MRI characteristics predict risk of pathological upgrade in patients with ISUP grade group 1 prostate cancer.
Boschheidgen M, Schimmöller L, Radtke JP, Kastl R, Jannusch K, Lakes J, Drewes LR, Radke KL, Esposito I, Albers P, Antoch G, Ullrich T, Al-Monajjed R. Boschheidgen M, et al. Eur Radiol. 2024 Sep 13. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11062-2. Online ahead of print. Eur Radiol. 2024. PMID: 39269474 - Multiplex imaging of localized prostate tumors reveals altered spatial organization of AR-positive cells in the microenvironment.
Ak Ç, Sayar Z, Thibault G, Burlingame EA, Kuykendall MJ, Eng J, Chitsazan A, Chin K, Adey AC, Boniface C, Spellman PT, Thomas GV, Kopp RP, Demir E, Chang YH, Stavrinides V, Eksi SE. Ak Ç, et al. iScience. 2024 Aug 3;27(9):110668. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110668. eCollection 2024 Sep 20. iScience. 2024. PMID: 39246442 Free PMC article.
References
- Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, Ghafoor A, Samels A, Ward E, et al. Cancer Statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004;54:8. - PubMed
- Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Gleason DF, Barry MJ. Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:975. - PubMed
- Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, Salo JO, Folmerz P, Haggman M, et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:781. - PubMed
- Wei JT, Dunn RL, Sandler HM, McLaughlin PW, Montie JE, Litwin MS, et al. Comprehensive comparison of health-related quality of life after contemporary therapies for localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:557. - PubMed
- Ross PL, Scardino PT, Kattan MW. A catalog of prostate cancer nomograms. J Urol. 2001;165:1562. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous