Diagnostic and prognostic factors in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review

Katharina Beyer* (Corresponding Author), Lisa Moris, Michael Lardas, Anna Haire, Francesco Barletta, Simone Scuderi, Megan Molnar, Ronald Herrera, Abdul Rauf, Riccardo Campi, Isabella Greco, Kirill Shiranov, Saeed Dabestani, Thomas van den Broeck, Arunan Sujenthiran, Mauro Gacci, Giorgio Gandaglia, Muhammad Imran Omar, Steven MacLennan, Monique J RoobolBahman Farahmand, Eleni Vradi, Zsuzsanna Devecseri, Alex Asiimwe, Jihong Zong, Sara MacLennan, Laurence Collette, James N'Dow, Alberto Briganti, Anders Bjartell, Mieke Van Hemelrijck, PIONEER Consortium

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: As part of the PIONEER Consortium objectives, we have explored which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are available in relation to our previously defined clinician and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for prostate cancer (PCa).
Design: We performed a systematic review to identify validated and non-validated studies. Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched on January 21, 2020.
Eligibility criteria: Only quantitative studies were included. Single studies with fewer than 50 participants, published before 2014 and looking at outcomes which are not prioritised in the PIONEER core outcome set will be excluded.
Data extraction and synthesis: After initial screening, we extracted data following the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of prognostic factor studies (CHARMS-PF) criteria and discussed the identified factors with a multidisciplinary expert group. The quality of the included papers was scored for applicability and risk of bias using validated tools such as PROBAST, QUIPS and QUADAS-2.
Results: The search identified 6,604 studies, from which 489 DPFs were included. Sixty-four of those were internally or externally validated. However, only three studies on diagnostic and seven studies on prognostic factors had a low risk of bias and a low risk concerning applicability.
Conclusion: Most of the DPFs identified require additional evaluation and validation in properly designed studies before they can be recommended for us e in clinical practice. The PIONEER online search tool for diagnostic and prognostic factors for prostate cancer will enable researchers to understand the quality of the current research and help them design future studies.
Ethics and Dissemination: There are no ethical implications.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere058267
Number of pages10
JournalBMJ Open
Issue number12
Early online date4 Apr 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 4 Apr 2022

Keywords

  • Prostate cancer
  • diagnostic factor
  • prognostic factors
  • big data
  • RWE

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Diagnostic and prognostic factors in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this