Biomedical subjects

Laura Peters

Publications and source records attributed to Laura Peters.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Recursive partitioning for risk stratification in men undergoing repeat prostate biopsies.

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to identify risk factors and risk groups for carcinoma detection in men undergoing repeat prostate biopsies. METHODS: The medical records of all men who had a negative initial prostate biopsy and underwent at least one repeat biopsy between 1992 and 2003 were reviewed to extract age, race, family history of prostate carcinoma, body mass index, referral indication, all prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values, digital rectal examination, PSA density (PSAD), the presence of a hypoechoic lesion, and the presence of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) on initial biopsy. Risk factors for a subsequent diagnosis of prostate carcinoma were identified using the log-rank test and a stepwise, stratified Cox regression model. Based on the risk factors identified by Cox regression analysis, recursive partitioning was further used for risk stratification. RESULTS: A total of 373 patients underwent 975 biopsy procedures. During a median follow-up of 37.0 months, prostate carcinoma was detected in 107 of 373 patients (28.9%). Independent predictors of a positive biopsy (P < 0.05) were PSA doubling time (PSADT), PSAD, referral indication, the presence of HGPIN, patient age, and family history of prostate carcinoma. Recursive partitioning identified 4 distinct risk groups that were characterized by their PSADT and PSAD and the presence of HGPIN and had estimated 2-year and 5-year carcinoma detection rates of 3 +/- 1% and 21 +/- 4%, 28 +/- 5% and 40 +/- 7%, 22 +/- 6% and 58 +/- 8%, and 66 +/- 9% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The authors identified a series of independent risk factors for prostate carcinoma detection after an initial negative prostate biopsy and characterized clinically meaningful and distinct patient risk groups. Despite a negative initial biopsy, patients with high-risk features remain at risk for the detection of prostate carcinoma.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Improved detection of prostate cancer using classification and regression tree analysis.

PURPOSE: To build a decision tree for patients suspected of having prostate cancer using classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were uniformly collected on 1,433 referred men with a serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of < or = 10 ng/mL who underwent a prostate biopsy. Factors analyzed included demographic, laboratory, and ultrasound data (ie, hypoechoic lesions and PSA density [PSAD]). Twenty percent of the data was randomly selected and reserved for study validation. CART analysis was performed in two steps, initially using PSA and digital rectal examination (DRE) alone and subsequently using the remaining variables. RESULTS: CART analysis selected a PSA cutoff of more than 1.55 ng/mL for further work-up, regardless of DRE findings. CART then selected the following subgroups at risk for a positive biopsy: (1) PSAD more than 0.165 ng/mL/cc; (2) PSAD < or = 0.165 ng/mL/cc and a hypoechoic lesion; (3) PSAD < or = 0.165 ng/mL/cc, no hypoechoic lesions, age older than 55.5 years, and prostate volume < or = 44.0 cc; and (4) PSAD < or = 0.165 ng/mL/cc, no hypoechoic lesions, age older than 55.5 years, and 50.25 cc less than prostate volume < or = 80.8 cc. In the validation data set, specificity and sensitivity were 31.3% and 96.6%, respectively. Cancers that were missed by the CART were Gleason score 6 or less in 93.4% of cases. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis showed that CART and logistic regression models had similar accuracy (area under the curve = 0.74 v 0.72, respectively). CONCLUSION: Application of CART analysis to the prostate biopsy decision results in a significant reduction in unnecessary biopsies while retaining a high degree of sensitivity when compared with the standard of performing a biopsy of all patients with an abnormal PSA or DRE.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Clinical outcomes of androgen deprivation as the sole therapy for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the clinical outcomes of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as the sole therapy for localized prostate cancer, and to determine independent predictors of disease progression, as recent studies indicate an increasing use of ADT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of all patients with cT1-4NXM0 adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated with ADT as the primary initial therapy at the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center between 1993 and 2000 were reviewed. Age, race, Charlson Health Index, family history, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, PSA density, digital rectal examination (DRE) findings, Gleason score, and percentage of positive biopsy cores at diagnosis were recorded for 81 patients. Patients had a median (SD, range) age of 73 (5.6, 58-84) years, a PSA level of 14.3 (34.6, 1.4-252) ng/mL and tumours were classified as Gleason score < or = 5 in 9% of patients, 6 in 31%, 7 in 31% and 8-10 in 30%. Outcomes extracted were PSA progression, PSA nadir, bone fractures, local progression, distant progression and overall survival. RESULTS: With a median (range) follow-up of 54 (6-115) months, the incidence of local progression, distant progression, bone fractures, PSA progression, and death were 10%, 7%, 25%, 21% and 41% respectively. The percentage of positive biopsy cores > or = 83%, age < 70 years, Gleason score > or = 7, abnormal DRE, and PSA nadir > or = 0.2 ng/mL were significantly associated with PSA progression by univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis identified age < 70 years (hazard ratio 6.52, 95% confidence interval 2.29-18.55) and Gleason score > or = 6 (4.0, 2.0-12.0) as independent risk factors for PSA progression. CONCLUSIONS: ADT resulted in modest control of localized prostate cancer, but younger patients and those with Gleason > or = 6 cancers were at higher risk of treatment failure. Toxicity, principally in the form of bone fractures, was high.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed2004

Predictors of delayed therapy after expectant management for localized prostate cancer in the era of prostate-specific antigen.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for delayed cancer-directed intervention in modern era prostate cancer patients who initially elect expectant management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational, cohort study of expectantly managed patients, diagnosed with clinical T(1-4)NxM0 prostate cancer between 1993 and 2000 was carried out. Data including TNM stage, age, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate gland volume by transrectal ultrasound, Gleason score, percent biopsies positive for cancer, imaging results, initial treatment selection, and outcome data were collected on all patients. RESULTS: 192 of 561 patients (34.3%) elected expectant management, and follow-up data were available for 187 (97.4%) patients. With a median follow-up of 3.6 years, 90 (48.1%) patients had a cancer-directed intervention. Gleason score (p = 0.0097) and percent of positive biopsy cores (p = 0.03) were independent predictors of time to intervention. As expected, PSA doubling time became the most significant predictor of intervention (p = 0.0057) when added to the model. These independent covariates are able to characterize low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups for cancer-directed intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer-directed intervention is common in patients who choose expectant management in the PSA era. Gleason score and percent of positive biopsy cores predict cancer-directed interventions, thus, these patients may be least suitable for expectant management.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed2003

Predictive modeling for the presence of prostate carcinoma using clinical, laboratory, and ultrasound parameters in patients with prostate specific antigen levels < or = 10 ng/mL.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to develop a model for predicting the presence of prostate carcinoma using clinical, laboratory, and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) data. METHODS: Data were collected on 1237 referred men with serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels < or = 10 ng/mL who underwent an initial prostate biopsy. Variables analyzed included age, race, family history, referral indication(s), prior vasectomy, digital rectal examination (DRE), PSA level, PSA density (PSAD), and TRUS findings. Twenty percent of the data were reserved randomly for study validation. Logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the relative risk, 95% confidence interval, and P values. RESULTS: Independent predictors of a positive biopsy result included elevated PSAD, abnormal DRE, hypoechoic TRUS finding, and age 75 years or older. Based on these variables, a predictive nomogram was developed. The sensitivity and specificity of the model were 92% and 24%, respectively, in the validation study for which the predictive probability > or = 10% was used to indicate the presence of prostate carcinoma. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the model was 73%, which was significantly higher compared with the prediction based on PSA alone (AUC, 62%). If it was validated externally, then application of this model to the biopsy decision could result in a 24% reduction in unnecessary biopsy procedures, with an overall reduction of 20%. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of clinical, laboratory, and TRUS data into a prebiopsy nomogram significantly improved the prediction of prostate carcinoma over the use of individual factors alone. Predictive nomograms may serve as an aid to patient counseling regarding prostate biopsy outcome and to reduce the number of unnecessary biopsy procedures.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed2002

Derivation of risk based wipe surface screening levels for industrial scenarios.

The environmental characterization of building interiors and other surfaces has generally been performed with wipe-sampling because it is a non-destructive technique. There is no consensus, however, as to the interpretation of the results of wipe-sampling. Specifically, there is not a standardized method to determine if chemicals found at sampled levels pose a threat to human health. A methodology was developed, based on acceptable health risk levels, to derive screening levels for evaluating wipe-sampling results pertaining to industrial scenarios. The methodology was based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region IX Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) approach; a multi-exposure methodology commonly used for evaluating soil concentrations. PRGs are the USEPA determined health based goals for soil preliminary remediation efforts. Probabilistic techniques were used to conduct a sensitivity analysis of the methodology to determine which variables drive the ultimate screening levels. Discrete values were then selected based on standard industrial scenarios common to the US Army. The wipe surface screening levels reported are for use as preliminary guidelines which help to determine whether further sampling or cleanup are necessary. The levels are not meant as cleanup or compliance criteria.

Administration, Cutaneous↗