Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Pre- and Post-Operative Nomograms to Predict Recurrence-Free Probability in Korean Men with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

  • Minyong Kang ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Minyong Kang, Chang Wook Jeong

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Chang Wook Jeong ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Minyong Kang, Chang Wook Jeong

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Woo Suk Choi,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Yong Hyun Park,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea

  • Sung Yong Cho,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Boramae Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Sangchul Lee,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea

  • Seung Bae Lee,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Boramae Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Ja Hyeon Ku,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Sung Kyu Hong,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea

  • Seok-Soo Byun,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea

  • Hyeon Jeong,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Boramae Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Cheol Kwak,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Hyeon Hoe Kim,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Eunsik Lee,

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

  • Sang Eun Lee ,

    selee@snubh.org

    Affiliation Department of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea

  •  [ ... ],
  • Seoul National University-Uro-Oncology Group
  • [ view all ]
  • [ view less ]

Abstract

Objectives

Although the incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) is rapidly increasing in Korea, there are few suitable prediction models for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). We established pre- and post-operative nomograms estimating biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free probability after RP in Korean men with clinically localized PCa.

Patients and Methods

Our sampling frame included 3,034 consecutive men with clinically localized PCa who underwent RP at our tertiary centers from June 2004 through July 2011. After inappropriate data exclusion, we evaluated 2,867 patients for the development of nomograms. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to develop pre- and post-operative nomograms that predict BCR-free probability. Finally, we resampled from our study cohort 200 times to determine the accuracy of our nomograms on internal validation, which were designated with concordance index (c-index) and further represented by calibration plots.

Results

Over a median of 47 months of follow-up, the estimated BCR-free rate was 87.8% (1 year), 83.8% (2 year), and 72.5% (5 year). In the pre-operative model, Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA), the proportion of positive biopsy cores, clinical T3a and biopsy Gleason score (GS) were independent predictive factors for BCR, while all relevant predictive factors (PSA, extra-prostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node metastasis, surgical margin, and pathologic GS) were associated with BCR in the post-operative model. The c-index representing predictive accuracy was 0.792 (pre-) and 0.821 (post-operative), showing good fit in the calibration plots.

Conclusions

In summary, we developed pre- and post-operative nomograms predicting BCR-free probability after RP in a large Korean cohort with clinically localized PCa. These nomograms will be provided as the mobile application-based SNUH Prostate Cancer Calculator. Our nomograms can determine patients at high risk of disease recurrence after RP who will benefit from adjuvant therapy.

Introduction

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common malignancy among men worldwide, and is a primary leading cause of cancer-associated death in Western men [1]. After radical prostatectomy (RP), the current gold standard of treatment for clinically localized PCa [2], about 30% of patients who underwent RP developed biochemical recurrence (BCR). These are patients who should receive adjuvant therapy with careful surveillance [3], [4]. Pre-operative and post-operative prediction of BCR is important for patient counseling as well as informed decision-making of proper adjuvant therapeutic strategy [5]. In the past, determination of high risk of failure after RP primarily depended upon final pathologic stage [6]. However, some patients with a low pathologic stage of PCa will later develop recurrence, whereas many patients with an advanced pathologic stage of PCa will remain disease-free [7]. Several validated methods, including risk groupings, probability tables, artificial neural network and nomograms have been developed to predict BCR accurately despite the heterogeneity of PCa [8].

Nomograms are statistical tools that graphically represent a mathematical algorithm of the continuous probability of a particular endpoint. Nomograms currently offer the most accurate and discriminating performance for outcome prediction in patients with PCa [9]. Because these models are based on individual patient characteristics, nomograms have limited prediction accuracy when applied in different populations from those where the model was first developed [10]. Inaccurate performance can be more profound when other significant differences exist, such as ethnic and geographic variation [10]. Thus, nomograms based on Western populations may not predict well when directly applied to Asian, especially Korean populations.

Although the incidence of PCa is rapidly increasing in Korea, there are few suitable prediction models optimized to Korean patients. We recently developed a Korean nomogram to predict the pathological stage of clinically localized PCa after RP [11], and further examined its generalizability with a Korean multicenter cohort [12]. Other Korean nomograms for PCa predict particular variables, such as pathologic stage, extra-prostatic extension (EPE), and lymph node metastasis (LNM) [13][15]. However, nomograms to estimate oncologic outcomes, such as BCR-free probability after RP, have not been developed for patients with PCa in Korea, desirable to determine adjuvant therapeutic strategy. We therefore developed pre- and post-operative nomograms that are able to predict BCR-free probability at 1, 2 and 5 years after RP in a large Korean cohort with clinically localized PCa.

Patients and Methods

Ethics Statement

The Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) of both Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) and Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (SNUBH) approved this study (Approval number: SNUH, J-1402-102-560; SNUBH, B-1402-240-105). Because this study was carried out retrospectively, the IRBs waived the written informed consent from patients.

Patient Population

We reviewed the medical records of 3,034 consecutive patients diagnosed with clinical stage T1c–T3a PCa who underwent RP at SNUH and SNUBH from June 2004 through July 2011. One hundred and fifty-six patients who received radiation or hormone therapy before RP and those whose cancer spontaneously regressed were excluded. Eleven other patients who had missing medical records were also excluded. Thus, 2,867 patients became the cohort for the development and validation of nomograms in this study.

Examination of Clinicopathologic Factors

Preoperative variables consisting of clinical stage, preoperative Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) level, biopsy Gleason score (GS) and the proportion of positive biopsy cores (PPC) from biopsy results were reviewed. Postoperative variables consisting of preoperative PSA, GS of final pathologic results, EPE, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), LNM and surgical margin (SM) status were also reviewed. PPC was defined as the percentage of positive biopsy cores out of total biopsy cores. Clinical and pathological stages were determined by the 7th edition of the American joint committee on cancer (AJCC) staging system. All prostate samples after RP were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin and embedded in a paraffin block. After sectioning at 4-mm thickness using a standardized processing protocol, slides were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) for pathologic examination. Experienced genitourinary pathologists in each hospital examined all specimens with a standardized reporting protocol. All clinicopathological data used in this study are provided as supporting information (Table S1).

Statistical Analysis

We constructed Cox proportional hazards (PH) regression models using pre- and post-operative variables, and developed final pre- and post-operative nomograms to predict BCR, defined as a serum PSA value of 0.4 ng/ml or greater after RP.

To check the accuracy of our nomograms by concordance index (c-index), we used a resampling method with 200 bootstrap samples. Calibration plots were generated to examine the association between predictive values and actual data. All of the statistical analyses were carried out using the package ‘rms’ in R for Windows, version 3.0.1 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.r-project.org/) with the ‘rms’ package. Null hypotheses of no difference were rejected if p-values were less than.05, or, equivalently, if the 95% CIs of risk point estimates excluded 1.

Results

The clinical features of the patients are described in Table 1. The mean age was 65.9±6.6 (IQR: 62–71) at the time of RP. The mean preoperative serum PSA level was 11.6±12.2 ng/mL (IQR: 5.1–12.7 ng/mL). Of note, a large proportion of patients in this study had non-aggressive clinical features, including clinical T1c and T2a in 2,726 cases (95.4%), biopsy GS ≤6 in 1,394 cases (48.6%). In contrast, pathologic characteristics were turned to be more aggressive, including EPE in 990 cases (34.5%), SVI in 298 (10.4%), pathologic GS 7 (3+4) in 1,247 cases (43.5%), and GS 7 (4+3) in 547 cases (19.1%). The median follow-up was 47 months. BCR-free survival of the total patients is shown in Figure 1. The estimated BCR-free survival rates were 87.8% at 1 year, 83.8% at 2 year, and 72.5% at 5 year.

thumbnail
Figure 1. Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free probability during follow-up after radical prostatectomy.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100053.g001

thumbnail
Table 1. The clinicopathologic characteristics of the patients.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100053.t001

Pre- and post-operative multivariable Cox PH regression models appear in Table 2. In the pre-operative model, preoperative PSA (hazard ratio [HR] 2.802, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.177–3.608, P<0.001), PPC (HR 1.011, 95% CI 1.008–1.015, P<0.001), clinical T3a (versus T1c) (HR 2.281, 95% CI 1.197–4.345, P = 0.012) and biopsy GS (GS 7 to 10 versus GS 6, P<0.001) were independent predictive factors for BCR. Notably, all entered variables (preoperative PSA, EPE, SVI, LNM, SM and pathologic GS) were associated with BCR in the post-operative model. Among these prognostic factors, pathologic GS was the most significant predictor of disease recurrence, for example, the multivariable HR of GS 10 was 7.908 (95% CI 4.376–14.249, P<0.001) when compared to GS6.

thumbnail
Table 2. Pre- and post-operative Cox proportional hazards regression models.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100053.t002

Based on these results, we established graphical pre- and post-operative nomograms predicting the probability of BCR after RP (Figure 2-A and 2-B). On internal validation, the predictive accuracy of pre- and post-operative nomograms was 0.792 and 0.821 of c-index, respectively. The calibration plot for pre- (Figure 3-A) and post-operative nomograms (Figure 3-B) showed good correspondence between predicted and actual probability of BCR at two years, indicating these nomograms were well calibrated.

thumbnail
Figure 2. Pre- and post-operative nomograms predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free probability at 1, 2, and 5 years after radical prostatectomy.

Panel (A) represents pre-operative nomogram and panel (B) shows post-operative nomogram.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100053.g002

thumbnail
Figure 3. Calibration plots for pre- and post-operative nomograms predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free probability on internal validation for 2 years after radical prostatectomy.

Panel (A) and (B) represent calibration plots, respectively, for pre- and post-operative nomograms. Bootstrapping method was used for the internal validation of these nomograms. Grey line indicates the predictive performance of a perfect nomogram, and black line represents the predictive accuracy of our nomograms.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100053.g003

Discussion

Patients diagnosed with PCa are commonly involved in determining their therapeutic options based on the likelihood of oncologic control, complications and quality of life related to treatments, which can be predicted by validated statistical models [16]. Accurate prediction of individual risk of disease recurrence is essential in determining surveillance and adjuvant therapeutic strategy after local definitive therapy [8]. In this study, we developed pre- and postoperative nomograms to predict 1, 2, and 5 years freedom from BCR after RP based on a large Korean clinical series cohort with localized PCa. We evaluated all clinicopathologic data with Cox proportional hazards and bootstrapping methods that are current standard methods to develop a new nomogram in this field [17]. A nomogram should be calibrated with internal and external validation as gold standard method [18]. To evaluate our nomograms’ accuracy, we used a bootstrapping (resampling) that is a widely used statistical method for internal validation [19]. The c-index of pre- and post-operative nomograms was 0.792 and 0.821, validated by calibration plots. These results indicate that our nomograms are highly accurate and discriminate well, similar to well-known Western nomograms, and can be useful to predict BCR probability in Korean patients with clinically localized PCa who underwent RP.

Kattan et al. first reported a pre-operative nomogram (c-index 0.79) for disease recurrence using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis based on the data of 983 men with clinically localized PCa treated with RP [20]. They also developed a post-operative nomogram (c-index 0.89) for BCR after RP, based on 996 men with PCa treated with RP [21]. Later, they extended the prediction to 10 years after RP using Cox regression analysis based on 1,978 patients’ data, and the c-index of these updated nomograms was 0.76 on internal and 0.79 on external validation [22]. Urologists frequently use these nomograms when counseling their patients, because these models are regarded as accurate and discriminating prediction tools for BCR after RP. Despite the good performance of these Western nomograms, it is less than optimal to apply these tools directly to Korean patients because of geographic and ethnic/racial variations and environmental differences in clinical practice [11], [23]. Asian men, particularly Korean men, have a lower incidence of PCa, and more aggressive types of PCa compared to Western populations [24][26]. Similarly, approximately 45% of patients on TRUS biopsy and 75% of patients on pathologic examination of specimen had GS ≥7 in this study, whereas 30% of cases on biopsy and 45% of cases on pathology were observed with GS ≥7 in Western population-based pre- and post-operative nomograms [22]. In addition, PCa in Korea is not detected as early as in Western countries because PCa screening is not as commonly performed [27]. These discrepancies can undermine the accuracy of Western nomograms when they are recommended for Korean patients with PCa. Indeed, the updated Kattan nomogram showed a relatively lower c-index (0.76) with a poorly fitting calibration plot in Korean patients of PCa, while a higher c-index (0.81) was observed in a Western population [28]. The Seoul National University prostate cancer (SNU PC) stage calculator provided more accurate performance to predict several pathologic factors (organ-confined disease, EPE, SVI and LNM) than the 2013 Partin tables in a Korean multicenter cohort [12]. Furthermore, decision curve analyses, suggested as a novel approach to evaluate prediction models [29], also showed higher net benefits of the SNU PC stage calculator compared to 2013 Partin tables [12]. Therefore, different pathologic features and clinical environments should be considered when developing suitable ethnic- or nation-specific predictive models to overcome these limitations.

Cho et al. recently reported a post-operative nomogram predicting BCR-free survival, based on 723 Korean men with clinically localized PCa who underwent RP [28]. When they performed head-to-head comparison with the updated Kattan nomogram, their model gave superior predictions of BCR-free survival. Interestingly, they showed that preoperative PSA level was the strongest predictive factor on multivariable analysis. However, GS was the key independent predictor of disease recurrence in our post-operative nomogram. This result is consistent with current principals of considering GS the most significant predictor of disease recurrence among the three standard prognostic factors (GS, preoperative PSA and pathologic T stage) [30], [31]. Because the nomogram developed by Cho et al. was based on data collected from nineteen institutions, inter-individual variability for pathologic Gleason score interpretation can occur among pathologists. In contrast, we organized Seoul National University Uro-Oncology Group, and two experienced genitourinary pathologists communicated with each other periodically. That difference improves the quality of pathologic interpretation in this study, raising the reliability of our nomograms. Another important distinction of our prediction models is that we included LNM on multivariate analysis, now widely accepted as a significant risk factor for disease recurrence [31], while Cho et al. did not integrate LNM on their Korean nomogram.

There are several limitations to our pre- and post-operative nomograms. First, we collected and analyzed the data using retrospective methodology. Second, the five year time period may not be a definitive endpoint for predicting BCR because clinically significant prostate cancer can recur after five years of treatment [32]. We should extend the prediction of our models out to more than 10 years after RP. However, the majority of BCR are detected in the first three years after RP, and the patients with a shorter duration to BCR (3 years or less) are at a high risk of disease-specific death [33]. Thus, our nomograms predicting BCR can be useful to identify such high risk patients of disease recurrence after RP. Finally, we developed and validated these nomograms using patients treated at branch academic centers using a single practical set-up. To further determine the generalizability of these nomograms, external validation will be required by using populations of other academic hospitals or community based centers.

Conclusions

In sum, we established pre- and post-operative nomograms that predict BCR-free probability with high accuracy and reliability after RP in a large Korean cohort with clinically localized PCa. These nomograms will be integrated into the mobile application-based calculator (SNUH Prostate Cancer Calculator), and thereby can be easily used to identify patients at high risk of disease recurrence who will benefit from adjuvant or salvage therapy.

Supporting Information

Table S1.

The clinicopathological data used for developing nomograms in the present study.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100053.s001

(XLSX)

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: MK CWJ SEL. Performed the experiments: MK CWJ SL. Analyzed the data: MK CWJ SEL. Contributed to the writing of the manuscript: MK CWJ. Data collection: CWJ WSC YHP SYC SL SBL JHK SKH SSB HJ CK HHK EL SEL. Critical revision: MK CWJ HHK SEL.

References

  1. 1. Haas GP, Delongchamps N, Brawley OW, Wang CY, de la Roza G (2008) The worldwide epidemiology of prostate cancer: perspectives from autopsy studies. Can J Urol 15: 3866–3871.
  2. 2. Yan Y, Carvalhal GF, Catalona WJ, Young JD (2000) Primary treatment choices for men with clinically localized prostate carcinoma detected by screening. Cancer 88: 1122–1130.
  3. 3. Fichtner J (2000) The management of prostate cancer in patients with a rising prostate-specific antigen level. BJU Int 86: 181–190;quiz ii–iii.
  4. 4. Sengupta S, Blute ML, Bagniewski SM, Myers RP, Bergstralh EJ, et al. (2006) Increasing prostate specific antigen following radical prostatectomy and adjuvant hormonal therapy: doubling time predicts survival. J Urol 175: 1684–1690 discussion 1690.
  5. 5. Naito S (2005) Evaluation and management of prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 35: 365–374.
  6. 6. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW (2006) Nomograms for prostate cancer. BJU Int 98: 39–46.
  7. 7. Kattan MW, Stapleton AM, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT (1997) Evaluation of a nomogram used to predict the pathologic stage of clinically localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 79: 528–537.
  8. 8. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Roehrborn CG, Kattan MW (2008) An updated catalog of prostate cancer predictive tools. Cancer 113: 3075–3099.
  9. 9. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Suardi N, Kattan MW (2008) Comparison of nomograms with other methods for predicting outcomes in prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Clin Cancer Res 14: 4400–4407.
  10. 10. Iremashvili V, Lokeshwar SD (2012) Editorial comment to nomograms to predict the pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer in Korean men: comparison with western predictive tools using decision curve analysis. Int J Urol 19: 853–854.
  11. 11. Jeong CW, Jeong SJ, Hong SK, Lee SB, Ku JH, et al.. (2012) Nomograms to predict the pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer in Korean men: comparison with western predictive tools using decision curve analysis. Int J Urol 19: 846–852; author reply 853–844.
  12. 12. Jeong CW, Byun SS, Lee E, Lee SE, Chung BH, et al. (2013) Seoul National University Prostate Cancer Stage Calculator: Generalization and Head-to-Head Comparison with 2013 Partin Table by Multicenter Cohort. Korean J Urol Oncol 11: 133–140.
  13. 13. Song C, Kang T, Ro JY, Lee MS, Kim CS, et al. (2005) Nomograms for the prediction of pathologic stage of clinically localized prostate cancer in Korean men. J Korean Med Sci 20: 262–266.
  14. 14. Chung JS, Choi HY, Song HR, Byun SS, Seo S, et al. (2010) Preoperative nomograms for predicting extracapsular extension in Korean men with localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional clinicopathologic study. J Korean Med Sci 25: 1443–1448.
  15. 15. Kim KH, Lim SK, Kim HY, Han WK, Choi YD, et al.. (2013) Yonsei nomogram to predict lymph node invasion in Asian men with prostate cancer during robotic era. BJU Int. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12280.
  16. 16. Shariat SF, Kattan MW, Vickers AJ, Karakiewicz PI, Scardino PT (2009) Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools. Future Oncol 5: 1555–1584.
  17. 17. Iasonos A, Schrag D, Raj GV, Panageas KS (2008) How to build and interpret a nomogram for cancer prognosis. Journal of Clinical Oncology 26: 1364–1370.
  18. 18. Shariat SF, Walz J, Roehrborn CG, Zlotta AR, Perrotte P, et al. (2008) External validation of a biomarker-based preoperative nomogram predicts biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 26: 1526–1531.
  19. 19. Chatterjee S (1998) Another look at the jackknife: further examples of generalized bootstrap. Statistics & Probability Letters 40: 307–319.
  20. 20. Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AM, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT (1998) A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 90: 766–771.
  21. 21. Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT (1999) Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 17: 1499–1507.
  22. 22. Stephenson AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Bianco FJ Jr, Dotan ZA, et al. (2006) Preoperative nomogram predicting the 10-year probability of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 98: 715–717.
  23. 23. Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, Ward E, Ferlay J, et al (2012) International variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol 61: 1079–1092.
  24. 24. Song C, Ro JY, Lee MS, Hong SJ, Chung BH, et al. (2006) Prostate cancer in Korean men exhibits poor differentiation and is adversely related to prognosis after radical prostatectomy. Urology 68: 820–824.
  25. 25. Byun SS, Lee S, Lee SE, Lee E, Seo SI, et al. (2012) Recent changes in the clinicopathologic features of Korean men with prostate cancer: a comparison with Western populations. Yonsei Med J 53: 543–549.
  26. 26. Li XG, Zhang DX, Cui XG, Xu DF, Hong Y, et al. (2012) Evaluating the oncologic outcomes in 152 patients undergoing extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Chin Med J (Engl) 125: 1529–1535.
  27. 27. Chung JS, Choi HY, Song HR, Byun SS, Seo SI, et al. (2011) Nomogram to predict insignificant prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy in Korean men: a multi-center study. Yonsei Med J 52: 74–80.
  28. 28. Cho YM, Jung SJ, Cho N, Kim MJ, Kattan MW, et al.. (2013) Impact of international variation of prostate cancer on a predictive nomogram for biochemical recurrence in clinically localised prostate cancer. World J Urol. DOI:10.1007/s00345-013-1111-6.
  29. 29. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB (2006) Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 26: 565–574.
  30. 30. Kotb AF, Elabbady AA (2011) Prognostic factors for the development of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer 2011: 485189.
  31. 31. Swanson GP, Basler JW (2010) Prognostic factors for failure after prostatectomy. J Cancer 2: 1–19.
  32. 32. Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Dotan ZA, Bianco FJ Jr, et al. (2006) Defining biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: a proposal for a standardized definition. J Clin Oncol 24: 3973–3978.
  33. 33. Freedland SJ, Moul JW (2007) Prostate specific antigen recurrence after definitive therapy. J Urol 177: 1985–1991.