Benign prostate hyperplasia and prostate cancer differentiation calculator
https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2025-13-1-13-18
Abstract
Introduction. Differential diagnosis of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (PCa) is a complex, multi-stage process. It is known that men with BPH and PCa have significant differences in their sexual activity throughout life.
Objective. To devise a model for predicting the risks of developing PCa or BPH, considering male sexual activity, and to construct a calculator based on this model to distinguish between the two conditions.
Materials & methods. An open prospective non-comparative сross-section study involved 47 men aged 49–71 years with BPH and 87 men aged 47 – 70 years who had been newly diagnosed with PCa. The patients underwent testing for serum PSA levels, total testosterone, and prostate volume. The results of the survey based on the “Rostov Integral Assessment of Male SExuality Questionnaire — RIAMSE” were evaluated.
Results. Logistic regression techniques have shown that a patient's sexuality, prostate volume, and PSA level can be predictive of a patient's risk of having either a BPH or an PCa. A 1-point increase in sexuality increases the odds that a patient will be diagnosed with BPH rather than PCa by an average of 1.08 times. If the volume of the PSA increases by 1 cm3, the odds of being diagnosed with BPH increase by an average of 1.15 times. A 1 ng/ml increase in PSA level decreases the odds of detecting BPH compared to PCa by a factor of 0.13. A differentiation calculator was developed based on the results of mathematical modelling.
Conclusion. The simple calculator presented in the study has a sensitivity and specificity > 0.90 and can be evaluated in upcoming clinical trials.
About the Authors
M. I. Kogan
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mikhail I. Kogan — Dr.Sc.(Med), Full Prof., Hons. Sci. of the Russian Federation
Rostov-on-Don
M. E. Efremov
Kuban State Medical University ; Prof. Ochapovsky Research Institute — Krasnodar Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mikhail E. Efremov — Сand.Sc.(Med)
Krasnodar
V. L. Medvedev
Kuban State Medical University ; Prof. Ochapovsky Research Institute — Krasnodar Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vladimir L. Medvedev — Dr.Sc. (Med.), Full Prof
Krasnodar
T. G. Sinyavskaya
Rostov State University of Economics (RINH)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana G. Sinyavskaya — Cand.Sc. (Econ), Assoc.Prof. (Docent)
Rostov-on-Don
References
1. Pushkar' D.YU., Rasner P.I. Differentsial'naya diagnostika raka i dobrokachestvennoi giperplazii predstatel'noi zhelezy. RMZH. 2014;17:1298. (In Russian). eLIBRARY ID: 21846217; EDN: SKBOXD
2. Rak predstatel'noi zhelezy: proteomika, genomika, khirurgiya. Moskva: ABV-press; 2019. (In Russian). ISBN: 978 5 903018 64 2
3. Merriel SWD, Pocock L, Gilbert E, Creavin S, Walter FM, Spencer A, Hamilton W. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for the detection of prostate cancer in symptomatic patients. BMC Med. 2022;20(1):54. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-021-02230-y
4. Drost FH, Osses DF, Nieboer D, Steyerberg EW, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ, Schoots IG. Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;4(4):CD012663. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012663.pub2
5. Wagaskar VG, Levy M, Ratnani P, Moody K, Garcia M, Pedraza AM, Parekh S, Pandav K, Shukla B, Prasad S, Sobotka S, Haines K, Punnen S, Wiklund P, Tewari A. Clinical Utility of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2021;28:9-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2021.03.008
6. Kogan M.I., Kireev A.Yu. The questionnaire of integral assessment of male sexuality. Urologiia. 2009;(1):46-50. (In Russian). eLIBRARY ID: 12162910; EDN: KGEESH
7. Farrell C, Noyes SL, Joslin J, Varma M, Moriarity A, Buchach C, Mammen L, Lane BR. Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Program Implementation and Impact: Initial Clinical Experience in a Community Based Health System. Urol Pract. 2018;5(3):165-171. DOI: 10.1016/j.urpr.2017.03.009
8. Louie KS, Seigneurin A, Cathcart P, Sasieni P. Do prostate cancer risk models improve the predictive accuracy of PSA screening? A metaanalysis. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(5):848-864. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdu525
9. Roobol MJ, Verbeek JFM, van der Kwast T, Kümmerlin IP, Kweldam CF, van Leenders GJLH. Improving the Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator for Initial Prostate Biopsy by Incorporating the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason Grading and Cribriform growth. Eur Urol. 2017;72(1):45-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.033
10. Schoots IG, Roobol MJ. Multivariate risk prediction tools including MRI for individualized biopsy decision in prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions. World J Urol. 2020;38(3):517-529. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-019-02707-9
11. Saba K, Wettstein MS, Lieger L, Hötker AM, Donati OF, Moch H, Ankerst DP, Poyet C, Sulser T, Eberli D, Mortezavi A. External Validation and Comparison of Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators Incorporating Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prediction of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2020;203(4):719-726. DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000622
12. Peters M, Eldred-Evans D, Kurver P, Falagario UG, Connor MJ, Shah TT, Verhoeff JJC, Taimen P, Aronen HJ, Knaapila J, Montoya Perez I, Ettala O, Stabile A, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Martini A, Cucchiara V, Briganti A, Lantz A, Picker W, Haug ES, Nordström T, Tanaka MB, Reddy D, Bass E, van Rossum PSN, Wong K, Tam H, Winkler M, Gordon S, Qazi H, Boström PJ, Jambor I, Ahmed HU. Predicting the Need for Biopsy to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-detected Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert ≥3 Lesion: Development and Multinational External Validation of the Imperial Rapid Access to Prostate Imaging and Diagnosis Risk Score. Eur Urol. 2022;82(5):559-568. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.07.022
13. Kogan M.I., Efremov M.E., Medvedev V.L., Anosov A.D., Bratova A.V. Sexual constitution (sexuality) of men with prostate cancer. Urologiia. 2024;(6):56-60. (In Russian). DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/urology.2024.6.53-60
Review
For citations:
Kogan M.I., Efremov M.E., Medvedev V.L., Sinyavskaya T.G. Benign prostate hyperplasia and prostate cancer differentiation calculator. Urology Herald. 2025;13(1):13-18. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2025-13-1-13-18
Views:
522
Email this article 
