External Validation of the UCSF-CAPRA (University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment) in Japanese Patients Receiving Radical Prostatectomy
External Validation of the UCSF-CAPRA (University of California, San Francisco, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment) in Japanese Patients Receiving Radical Prostatectomy
复制标题
UCSF-CAPRA（加州大学旧金山分校前列腺癌风险评估）在接受根治性前列腺切除术的日本患者中的外部验证
DOI：
10.1093/jjco/hyr136
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Fumio Ishizaki
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
水澤隆樹、原昇;他;Fumio Ishizaki
目的：2005年，加州大学旧金山分校开发了前列腺癌风险评估(UCSF-CAPRA)评分，作为一种新的风险分层工具。UCSF-CAPRA从0分到10分不等，由五个临床变量组成，分别是前列腺特异性抗原、格里森评分、T分期、阳性活检百分比和年龄。本研究的目的是验证UCSF-CAPRA评分在日本前列腺癌根治术患者中的有效性。方法1999-2010年间，211名接受前列腺癌根治术的男性患者接受了UCSF-CAPRA评分。采用Kaplan-Meier方法计算无生化进展生存率，采用对数秩法比较UCSF-Capra和D‘Amico危险类别。结果UCSF-CAPRA评分85例(40.3%)，106例(50.2%)，20例(9.5%)，分为0~2分(低危)、3~5分(中危)和6~10分(高危)。根据D‘Amico危险标准，66例(31.3%)、(42.2%)和56例(26.5%)分别被分层为低、中、高危险组。Kaplan-Meier分析表明，UCSF-CAPRA将患者显著划分为每个风险类别。在D‘Amico风险分类中，低度和中度之间没有显著差异。UCSFACPRA和D‘AMICO分级的c指数分别为0.755和0.713。结论UCSFCAPRA是当代Gleason分级时代日本前列腺癌根治术患者可接受的风险分类工具，与D’Amico风险分类相当。
Objective:In 2005, the University of California, San Francisco developed the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (UCSF-CAPRA) score as a new risk stratification tool. The UCSF-CAPRA, which ranges from 0 to 10 points, consists of five clinical variables, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, T stage, percent of positive biopsies and age. The aim of this study was to validate the UCSF-CAPRA score for Japanese prostate cancer patients receiving radical prostatectomy using the contemporary Gleason grading.MethodsFrom 1999 to 2010, 211 men who underwent radical prostatectomy were used for validation. Biochemical progression-free survival was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and the UCSF-CAPRA and D'Amico risk categories were compared using the log-rank method. The concordance index (c-index) for the UCSF-CAPRA and D'Amico risk classification was calculated.ResultsUsing the UCSF-CAPRA score, 85 (40.3%), 106 (50.2%) and 20 (9.5%) subjects were stratified as 0–2 points (low risk), 3–5 points (intermediate risk) and 6–10 points (high risk). Using the D'Amico risk criteria, 66 (31.3%), 89 (42.2%) and 56 (26.5%) were stratified as low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively. The Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that the UCSF-CAPRA divided the patients significantly into each risk category. There was no significant difference between low and intermediate in the D'Amico risk classification. Thec-index of the UCSF-CAPRA and D'Amico classification was 0.755 and 0.713, respectively.ConclusionThe UCSF-CAPRA is an acceptable risk category tool comparable to that of the D'Amico risk classification for Japanese prostate cancer patients receiving radical prostatectomy in the contemporary Gleason grading era.