Multi-cohort modeling strategies for scalable globally accessible prostate cancer risk tools
-
Published:2019-10-15
Issue:1
Volume:19
Page:
-
ISSN:1471-2288
-
Container-title:BMC Medical Research Methodology
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:BMC Med Res Methodol
Author:
Tolksdorf Johanna, Kattan Michael W., Boorjian Stephen A., Freedland Stephen J., Saba Karim, Poyet Cedric, Guerrios Lourdes, De Hoedt Amanda, Liss Michael A., Leach Robin J., Hernandez Javier, Vertosick Emily, Vickers Andrew J., Ankerst Donna P.ORCID
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Online clinical risk prediction tools built on data from multiple cohorts are increasingly being utilized for contemporary doctor-patient decision-making and validation. This report outlines a comprehensive data science strategy for building such tools with application to the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group prostate cancer risk prediction tool.
Methods
We created models for high-grade prostate cancer risk using six established risk factors. The data comprised 8492 prostate biopsies collected from ten institutions, 2 in Europe and 8 across North America. We calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for discrimination, the Hosmer-Lemeshow test statistic (HLS) for calibration and the clinical net benefit at risk threshold 15%. We implemented several internal cross-validation schemes to assess the influence of modeling method and individual cohort on validation performance.
Results
High-grade disease prevalence ranged from 18% in Zurich (1863 biopsies) to 39% in UT Health San Antonio (899 biopsies). Visualization revealed outliers in terms of risk factors, including San Juan VA (51% abnormal digital rectal exam), Durham VA (63% African American), and Zurich (2.8% family history). Exclusion of any cohort did not significantly affect the AUC or HLS, nor did the choice of prediction model (pooled, random-effects, meta-analysis). Excluding the lowest-prevalence Zurich cohort from training sets did not statistically significantly change the validation metrics for any of the individual cohorts, except for Sunnybrook, where the effect on the AUC was minimal. Therefore the final multivariable logistic model was built by pooling the data from all cohorts using logistic regression. Higher prostate-specific antigen and age, abnormal digital rectal exam, African ancestry and a family history of prostate cancer increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer, while a history of a prior negative prostate biopsy decreased risk (all p-values < 0.004).
Conclusions
We have outlined a multi-cohort model-building internal validation strategy for developing globally accessible and scalable risk prediction tools.
Funder
National Cancer Institute Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Informatics,Epidemiology
Reference21 articles.
1. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, Kwiatkowski M, Lujan M, Lilja H, Zappa M, Denis LJ, Recker F, Berenguer A, Määttänen L, Bangma CH, Aus G, Villers A, Rebillard X, van der Kwast T, Blijenberg BG, Moss SM, de Koning HJ, Auvinen A, ERSPC Investigators. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(13):1320–8.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0810084
. 2. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Feng Z, Parnes HL, Coltman CA Jr. Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(8):529–34.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj131
. 3. Chen R, Sjoberg DD, Huang Y, Xie L, Zhou L, He D, Vickers AJ, Sun Y, Chinese Prostate Cancer Consortium, Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group. Prostate specific antigen and prostate cancer in Chinese men undergoing initial prostate biopsies compared with western cohorts. J Urol. 2017;197(1):90–6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.103
. 4. Ankerst DP, Boeck A, Freedland SJ, Jones JS, Cronin AM, Roobol MJ, Hugosson J, Kattan MW, Klein EA, Hamdy F, Neal D, Donovan J, Parekh DJ, Klocker H, Horninger W, Benchikh A, Salama G, Villers A, Moreira DM, Schröder FH, Lilja H, Vickers AJ, Thompson IM. Evaluating the prostate cancer prevention trial high grade prostate cancer risk calculator in 10 international biopsy cohorts: results from the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group. World J Urol. 2014;32(1):185–91.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-012-0869-2
. 5. Strobl AN, Thompson IM, Vickers AJ, Ankerst DP. The next generation of clinical decision making tools: development of a real-time prediction tool for outcome of prostate biopsy in response to a continuously evolving prostate cancer landscape. J Urol. 2015;194(1):58–64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.092
.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|