MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089279818 · doi:10.1038/s41391-020-00283-3

KLK3 and TMPRSS2 for molecular lymph-node staging in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

2020· article· en· W3089279818 on OpenAlexaff
Lukas Lunger, Margitta Retz, Miriam Bandur, Marc Souchay, Elisabeth Vitzthum, Marion Jäger, Gregor Weirich, Tibor Schuster, Michael Autenrieth, Hubert Kübler, Tobias Maurer, Mark Thalgott, Kathleen Herkommer, Florestan Koll, Jürgen E. Gschwend, Roman Nawroth, Matthias Heck

Bibliographic record

VenueProstate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatectomyProstate cancerUrologyTMPRSS2Biochemical recurrenceLymph nodeProstate-specific antigenInternal medicineOncologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lymph-node (LN) metastasis in prostate cancer (PC) is a main risk factor for tumor recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). Molecular analysis facilitates detection of small-volume LN metastases with higher sensitivity than histopathology. We aimed to prospectively evaluate six candidate gene markers for detection of pelvic LN metastases and to determine their ability to predict biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) in patients treated with RP. METHODS: The expression of kallikrein 2, 3, and 4 (KLK2, KLK3, and KLK4), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) and transient receptor potential cation channel subfamily M member 8 (TRPM8) was assessed using qPCR. We analyzed LNs from 111 patients (intermediate PC, n = 32 (29%); high-risk PC, n = 79 (71%)) who underwent RP and extended pelvic lymph-node dissection without neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 2411 LNs were examined by molecular and histopathologic examination. Histopathology detected 69 LN metastases in 28 (25%) patients. KLK2 and KLK3 diagnostically performed best and classified all pN1-patients correctly as molecular node-positive (molN1/pN1). The concordance on LN level was best for KLK3 (96%). KLK2, KLK3, KLK4, PSMA, TMPRSS2, and TRPM8 reclassified 27 (24%), 32 (29%), 29 (26%), 8 (7%), 13 (12%), and 23 (21%) pN0-patients, respectively, as node-positive (pN0/molN1). On multivariable cox regression analysis molecular LN status (molN1 vs. molN0) using KLK3 (HR 4.0, p = 0.04) and TMPRSS2 (HR 5.1, p = 0.02) were independent predictors of bRFS. Median bRFS was shorter in patients with only molecular positive LNs (molN1/pN0) for KLK3 (24 months, p = 0.001) and for TMPRSS2 (12 months, p < 0.001) compared to patients with negative nodes (molN0/pN0) (median bRFS not reached). CONCLUSIONS: For diagnostic purposes, KLK3 showed highest concordance with histopathology for detection of LN metastases in PC patients undergoing RP. For prognostic purposes, KLK3 and TMPRSS2 expression were superior to histopathologic LN status and other transcripts tested for molecular LN status. We suggest a combined KLK3/TMPRSS2 panel as a valuable diagnostic and prognostic tool for molecular LN analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProstate Cancer and Prostatic DiseasesSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207