MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386004179 · doi:10.15406/unoaj.2023.11.00328

Prostate specific antigen density with a cut-off point of 0.12 is the best predictor of cancer on prostate biopsies  

2023· article· en· W4386004179 on OpenAlex
Tristán Dellavedova

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrology & Nephrology Open Access Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Casa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstate-specific antigenReceiver operating characteristicUrologyProstateBiopsyCancerProstate biopsyBiomarkerInternal medicineOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most frequent type of cancer in men; diagnosis is reached through prostate biopsy, an invasive procedure, so efforts are made to avoid unnecessary ones by improving them and optimizing current biomarkers. Among existing biomarkers, prostate -specific antigen (PSA) Density (PSAD), a PSA derivative, is considered a feasible biomarker for PCa Objective: This study aimed to evaluate different PSA derivatives as well as determine whether PSAD with a cut-off point of 0.12 was more accurate than the widely used value of 0.15 to recognize patients suffering from prostate cancer. Material and methods: Retrospective study of 391 patients aged 40 years or more, who underwent prostate biopsy at Fundacion Urologica Cordoba para la Docencia e Investigacion Medica (FUCDIM) , from November 2010 to July 2014. Sensitivity and specificity for the PSAD cut-off point of 0.12 were estimated. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated through Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and the Area Under the Curve. PSAD was compared to total PSA, free/total PSA index, and (free/total PSA)/PSAD. Results: Significantly higher mean values were found in terms of total PSA, PSAD, and F/T PSA in patients with confirmed diagnoses of PCa. PSAD with a cut-off point greater than 0.12 detected a significantly higher percentage of cancer, 80%, p=0.0001, compared to the control group. Furthermore, the strength of association determined that patients with PSAD greater than 0.12 were 3 times more likely to belong to the PCa group. Conclusion: Total PSA, PSAD, and F/T PSA in patients with cancer yielded significantly higher mean values. The best biomarker to predict prostate cancer by biopsy was PSAD, with a cut-off point of 0.12. These results indicate the need to develop further investigations in diverse geographic areas to define the best local cut-off points for PSAD. Our results demonstrate that the established cut-off point of 0.15 could be appropriate for European men but appears to be too high for American and low for Asian males.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.306 · 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