Saratov JOURNAL of Medical and Scientific Research

Integrative approach to pre-operative determination of clinically significant prostate cancer

Year: 2015, volume 11 Issue: №3 Pages: 345-348
Heading: Proceedings of all-Russia week of science with international participants Article type: Original article
Authors: Shatylko T.V., Popkov V.M., Fomkin R.N.
Organization: Saratov State Medical University

Aim: improvement of early diagnostics of prostate cancer by developing a technique, which makes possible to predict its clinical significance in outpatient setting before initiation of invasive procedures. Material and Methods. Clinical data of 398 patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy in 2012-2014 in SSMU S. R. Mirotvortsev Clinical Hospital, was used to build an artificial neural network, while its output allowed to determine whether the tumour corresponds to Epstein criteria and which D'Amico risk group it belongs to. Internal validation was performed on 80 patients, who underwent prostate biopsy in September 2014 — December 2014. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of artificial neural network were calculated. Results. Accuracy of predicting adenocarcinoma presence in biopsy specimen was 93,75%; accuracy of predicting whether the cancer meets active surveillance criteria was 90%. Accuracy of predicting T stage (T1c, T2a, T2b, T2c)was 57,1%. Prediction of D'Amico risk group was accurate in 70% of cases; for low-risk cancer accuracy was 81,2%. Conclusion. Artificial neural networks may be responsible for prostate cancer risk stratification and determination of its clinical significance prior to biopsy.

1. Murphy DG, Ahlering T, Catalona WJ, et al. The Melbourne Consensus Statement on the early detection of prostate cancer. BJU lnt2014Feb; 113(2): 186-8
2. Iremashvili V, Pelaez L, Manoharan M, et al. Pathologic prostate cancer characteristics in patients eligible for active surveillance: a head-to-head comparison of contemporary protocols. Eur Urol 2012 Sep; 62 (3): 462-8
3. Kryvenko ON, Carter HB, Trock BJ. Biopsy criteria for determining appropriateness for active surveillance in the modern era. Urology 2014 Apr; 83 (4): 869-74
4. Nguyen CT, Kattan MW. Formalized prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer: is it possible? Asian J Androl 2012 May; 14(3): 349-54
5. Ecke TH, Hallmann S, Koch S, et al. External validation of an artificial neural network and two nomograms for prostate cancer detection. ISRN Urol 2012; 2012: 643181
6. Snow PB, Smith DS, Catalona WJ. Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer: a pilot study. J Urol 152: 1923-26
7. Lawrentschuk N, Lockwood G, Davies P, et al.Predicting prostate biopsy outcome: artificial neural networks and polychot-omous regression are equivalent models. Int Urol Nephrol 2011 Mar; 43(1): 23-30
8. PopkovVM, ShatylkoTV, Fomkin RN. Prognosis of prostate gland morphology study using artificial neural network. Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research 2014.10(2): 328-32
9. Shatylko TV, Sedov DS. PSA gray zone: statistical mathematical analysis using artificial neural networks. Bulletin of Medical Internet conferences 2014; 4 (4): 417
10. Popkov VM, Shatylko TV, Korolev AYu, et al. Optimization of PSA-screening using artificial intellect. Bashkortostan Medical Journal 2015; 10 (3): 232-5
11. Popkov VM, Fomkin RN, Blumberg Bl. Possibilities of prognosis of prostate cancer relapse after HIFU ablation by mathematical modeling. Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research 2013; 9 (2): 314-320.

2015_03_345-348.pdf302.33 KB

No votes yet