IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v39y2019i5p499-508.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personalized Decision Making for Biopsies in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Anirudh Tomer

    (Department of Biostatistics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands)

  • Dimitris Rizopoulos

    (Department of Biostatistics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands)

  • Daan Nieboer

    (Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands)

  • Frank-Jan Drost

    (Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands)

  • Monique J. Roobol

    (Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands)

  • Ewout W. Steyerberg

    (Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands
    Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, the Netherlands)

Abstract

Background. Low-risk prostate cancer patients enrolled in active surveillance programs commonly undergo biopsies for examination of cancer progression. Biopsies are conducted as per a fixed and frequent schedule (e.g., annual biopsies). Since biopsies are burdensome, patients do not always comply with the schedule, which increases the risk of delayed detection of cancer progression. Objective. Our aim is to better balance the number of biopsies (burden) and the delay in detection of cancer progression (less is beneficial) by personalizing the decision of conducting biopsies. Data Sources. We used patient data of the world’s largest active surveillance program (Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance; PRIAS). It enrolled 5270 patients, had 866 cancer progressions, and an average of 9 prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and 5 digital rectal examination (DRE) measurements per patient. Methods. Using joint models for time-to-event and longitudinal data, we model the historical DRE and PSA measurements and biopsy results of a patient at each follow-up visit. This results in a visit and patient-specific cumulative risk of cancer progression. If this risk is above a certain threshold, we schedule a biopsy. We compare this personalized approach with the currently practiced biopsy schedules via an extensive and realistic simulation study, based on a replica of the patients from the PRIAS program. Results. The personalized approach saved a median of 6 biopsies (median: 4, interquartile range [IQR]: 2–5) compared with the annual schedule (median: 10, IQR: 3–10). However, the delay in detection of progression (years) is similar for the personalized (median: 0.7, IQR: 0.3–1.0) and the annual schedule (median: 0.5, IQR: 0.3–0.8). Conclusions. We conclude that personalized schedules provide substantially better balance in the number of biopsies per detected progression for men with low-risk prostate cancer.

Suggested Citation

  • Anirudh Tomer & Dimitris Rizopoulos & Daan Nieboer & Frank-Jan Drost & Monique J. Roobol & Ewout W. Steyerberg, 2019. "Personalized Decision Making for Biopsies in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Programs," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(5), pages 499-508, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:5:p:499-508
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19861963
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X19861963
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X19861963?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:5:p:499-508. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.