Comparison between Briganti, Partin and MSKCC tools in predicting positive lymph nodes in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References

• Wong MC, Goggins WB, Wang HH, et al. Global incidence and mortality for prostate cancer: analysis of temporal patterns and trends in 36 countries. Eur Urol. 2016;70:862–874.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beauval JB, Roumiguie M, Filleron T, et al. Biochemical recurrence-free survival and pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. BMC Urol. 2016;16:26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Suardi N, et al. More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;67:212–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Hadaschik BA, et al. Comparison of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA PET/MRI and (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of lymph node and bone metastases of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:70–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B, et al. Prospective evaluation of 68gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2016;119:209–215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, et al. Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology. 2007;69:1095–1101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cagiannos I, Karakiewicz P, Eastham JA, et al. A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003;170:1798–1803.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol. 2012;61:480–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter SD, Sinuff T. Studies reporting ROC curves of diagnostic and prediction data can be incorporated into meta-analyses using corresponding odds ratios. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:530–534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50:1088–1101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdollah F, Schmitges J, Sun M, et al. Head-to-head comparison of three commonly used preoperative tools for prediction of lymph node invasion at radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2011;78:1363–1367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blute ML, Bergstralh EJ, Partin AW, et al. Validation of Partin tables for predicting pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2000;164:1591–1595.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eifler JB, Feng Z, Lin BM, et al. An updated prostate cancer staging nomogram (Partin tables) based on cases from 2006 to 2011. BJU Int. 2013;111:22–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penson DF, Grossfeld GD, Li YP, et al. How well does the Partin nomogram predict pathological stage after radical prostatectomy in a community based population? Results of the cancer of the prostate strategic urological research endeavor. J Urol. 2002;167:1653–1657. discussion 7–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turo R, Forster JA, West RM, et al. Do prostate cancer nomograms give accurate information when applied to European patients? Scand J Urol. 2015;49:16–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu JB, Makarov DV, Sharma R, et al. Validation of the partin nomogram for prostate cancer in a national sample. J Urol. 2010;183:105–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav R, Arora S, Sachdeva M, et al. Assessment of the performance of Partin’s nomogram (2007) in contemporary Indian cohort. Indian J Urol. 2016;32:199–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leyh-Bannurah SR, Gazdovich S, Budäus L, et al. Population-based external validation of the updated 2012 Partin tables in contemporary North American prostate cancer patients. Prostate. 2017;77:105–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion based on the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2006;98:788–793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briganti A, Gallina A, Suardi N, et al. A nomogram is more accurate than a regression tree in predicting lymph node invasion in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2008;101:556–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell'Oglio P, Abdollah F, Suardi N, et al. External validation of the European association of urology recommendations for pelvic lymph node dissection in patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2014;28:416–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gacci M, Schiavina R, Lanciotti M, et al. External validation of the updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Urol Int. 2013;90:277–282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen J, Rink M, Bianchi M, et al. External validation of the updated Briganti nomogram to predict lymph node invasion in prostate cancer patients undergoing extended lymph node dissection. Prostate. 2013;73:211–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heidenreich A, Pfister D, Thuer D, et al. Percentage of positive biopsies predicts lymph node involvement in men with low-risk prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. BJU Int. 2011;107:220–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walz J, Bladou F, Rousseau B, et al. Head to head comparison of nomograms predicting probability of lymph node invasion of prostate cancer in patients undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Urology. 2012;79:546–551.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godoy G, Chong KT, Cronin A, et al. Extent of pelvic lymph node dissection and the impact of standard template dissection on nomogram prediction of lymph node involvement. Eur Urol. 2011;60:195–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinev AI, Anakievski D, Kolev NH, et al. Validation of nomograms predicting lymph node involvement in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Urol Int. 2014;92:300–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC, et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011;185:869–875.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar