Comparing Association of Preoperative Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Weight with Prostate Weight Obtained After Radical Prostatectomy

• Activity Number: 75 - Contributed Poster Presentations: Biometrics Section
• Type: Contributed
• Date/Time: Monday, August 3, 2020 : 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM
• Sponsor: Biometrics Section
• Author(s): Irene Helenowski* and Sean Sachdev and Borko D Jovanovic and Michael J Gurley and Robin G Leikin and William J Catalona and Timothy M Kuzel
• Companies: Northwestern University and Northwestern University and Northwestern University and Northwestern University and Northwestern University and Northwestern University and Rush University
• Keywords: TRUS; linear regression; prediction

Abstract

Prostate weight may be an important diagnostic factor in prostate cancer and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) could be a favorable alternative to the lengthy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedure and to invasive surgery. One issue with TRUS measurements, however, involves underestimation of the prostate weight. In this work, we present three models, unadjusted (1), adjusted for clinical factors as Gleason score, and pathological stage (2), and adjusted for demographic factors as age, BMI, and race, as well as clinical factors (3), that correct for this underestimation. The regression coefficients for the TRUS variable are similar among these models with values and standard errors of 9.309 (0.380), 9.227 (0.381), and 9.090 (0.398), respectively, and the predicted values from these models compare fairly well to the actual prostate weights. R-squared values approximating 0.58 also indicate that each of these models fit the data well. Therefore, we recommend application of these models to TRUS measurements, pending on what other clinical information may be available for the patient.