Search

Your search keyword '"Farahmand B"' showing total 4 results
Start Over Author "Farahmand B" Journal bmj open
4 results on '"Farahmand B"'

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

Author

Beyer, K., Moris, L., Lardas, M., Haire, A., Barletta, F., Scuderi, S., Molnar, M., Herrera, R., Rauf, A., Campi, R., Greco, I., Shiranov, K., Dabestani, S., Broeck, T. Van den, Arun, S., Gacci, M., Gandaglia, G., Omar, M.I., MacLennan, S., Roobol, M.J., Farahmand, B., Vradi, E., Devecseri, Z., Asiimwe, A., Zong, J., MacLennan, S.J., Collette, L., J, N.D., Briganti, A., Huisman, H.J., Bjartell, A., and Hemelrijck, M. Van

Subjects
Male, Bias, Urological cancers Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 15], Humans, Mass Screening, Prostatic Neoplasms, General Medicine, Prognosis
Abstract

ObjectivesAs 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 for prostate cancer (PCa).DesignWe performed a systematic review to identify validated and non-validated studies.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched on 21 January 2020.Eligibility criteriaOnly 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 were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisAfter 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, Quality in Prognostic Studies and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2.ResultsThe search identified 6604 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.ConclusionMost of the DPFs identified require additional evaluation and validation in properly designed studies before they can be recommended for use in clinical practice. The PIONEER online search tool for DPFs for PCa will enable researchers to understand the quality of the current research and help them design future studies.Ethics and disseminationThere are no ethical implications.

Published
2022

2. Diagnostic and prognostic factors in patients with prostate cancer

Author

Antonella Cardone, Nicolas Mottet, Lisa Moris, Michael Lardas, Anna Haire, Francesco Barletta, Simone Scuderi, Eleni Vradi, Giorgio Gandaglia, Steven MacLennan, Bahman Farahmand, Sara J Maclennan, Zsuzsanna Devecseri, Alex Asiimwe, Laurence Collette, Anders Bjartell, James Ndow, James N'Dow, Karin Plass, Maria Ribal, Thomas Van den Broeck, Peter-Paul Willemse, Karl H Pang, Riccardo Campi, Isabella Greco, Mauro Gacci, Sergio Serni, Susan Evans-Axelsson, Ragnar Lonnerbro, Daniele Crosti, Massimiliano Meoni, Roberto Garzonio, Chris Bangma, Monique Roobol, Sebastiaan Remmers, Derya Tilki, Teemu Murtola, Tapio Visakorpi, Kirsi Talala, Teuvo Tammela, Aino Siltari, Stephane Lejeune, Femke van Diggelen, Georgia Taxiarchopoulou, Ketharini Senthilkumar, Stefanie Schütte, Sophie Byrne, Luz Fialho, Paulina Gono, Monica De Vetter, Klevisa Ceke, Bertrand De Meulder, Charles Auffray, Irina-Afrodita Balaur, Nesrine Taibi, Shaun Power, Nazanin Zounemat Kermani, Kees van Bochove, Marinel Cavelaars, Maxim Moinat, Emma Voss, Chiara Bernini, Denis Horgan, Louise Fullwood, Marc Holtorf, Doron Lancet, Gabi Bernstein, Imran Omar, Sara MacLennan, Jemma Healey, Johannes Huber, Manfred Wirth, Michael Froehner, Beate Brenner, Angelika Borkowetz, Christian Thomas, Friedemann Horn, Kristin Reiche, Markus Kreuz, Andreas Josefsson, Delila Gasi Tandefelt, Jonas Hugosson, Jack Schalken, Henkjan Huisman, Thomas Hofmarcher, Emelie Andersson, Adam Fridhammar, Frank Verholen, John-Edward Butler-Ransohoff, Todd Williamson, Kumari Chandrawansa, Dorothy Dlamini, Reg Waldeck, Megan Molnar, Amanda Bruno, Ronald Herrera, Ekaterina Nevedomskaya, Niculae Constantinovici, Carl Steinbeißer, Sini Thomas, Monika Maass, Patrizia Torremante, Marc Dietrich Voss, Guido Cuperus, Chad Dau Kishore, Papineni Jing, Wang-silvanto Steve, Hass Robert, Snijder Verena, Doyé Xuewei, Wang Andy Garnham, Mark Lambrecht, Russ Wolfinger, Stijn Rogiers, Angela Servan, Florence Lefresne, Joaquin Casariego, Mohamed Samir, Joe Lawson, Katie Pascoe, Bertrand Jaton, Daniel Bakkard, Heidi Turunen, Olavi Kilkku, Pasi Pohjanjousi, Olli Voima, Liina Nevalaita, Sonia Araujo, Elaine Longden-Chapman, Gordon McVie, Danny Burke, Paul Agapow, Sahra Derkits, Muriel Licour, Charles McCrea, Sarah Payne, Alan Yong, Flavia Lujan, Billy Franks, Michael Bussmann, Inken Köhle, Urology, Beyer, K., Moris, L., Lardas, M., Haire, A., Barletta, F., Scuderi, S., Vradi, E., Gandaglia, G., Omar, M. I., Maclennan, S., Zong, J., Farahmand, B., Maclennan, S. J., Devecseri, Z., Asiimwe, A., Collette, L., Bjartell, A., Ndow, J., Briganti, A., and Van Hemelrijck, M.

Subjects
Male, medicine.medical_specialty, Urological tumours, Urology, 03 medical and health sciences, Prostate cancer, 0302 clinical medicine, Prostate disease, Bias, SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being, Multidisciplinary approach, Urological cancers Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences [Radboudumc 15], Medicine, Humans, Medical physics, In patient, 030212 general & internal medicine, Protocol (science), Diagnostic Factor, urological tumours, business.industry, Quality assessment, Prostatic Neoplasms, General Medicine, medicine.disease, Prognosis, 3. Good health, Europe, Systematic review, Oncology, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Urological cancers Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 15], oncology, Model risk, business, prostate disease, Systematic Reviews as Topic
Abstract

IntroductionAs part of the PIONEER (Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Enhancement Through the Power of Big Data in Europe) Consortium, we will explore which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are currently being researched to previously defined clinical and patient-reported outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa).Methods and analysisThis research project will follow the following four steps: (1) a broad systematic literature review of DPFs for all stages of PCa, covering evidence from 2014 onwards; (2) discussion of systematic review findings by a multidisciplinary expert panel; (3) risk of bias assessment and applicability with Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool (QUIPS) and (4) additional quantitative assessments if required.Ethics and disseminationWe aim to develop an online tool to present the DPFs identified in this research and make them available across all stakeholders. There are no ethical implications.

Published
2021

3. Risk of venous thromboembolism in men with prostate cancer compared with men in the general population: a nationwide population-based cohort study in Sweden.

Author

Balabanova Y, Farahmand B, Garmo H, Stattin P, and Brobert G

Subjects
Cohort Studies, Humans, Incidence, Male, Risk Factors, Sweden epidemiology, Prostatic Neoplasms complications, Prostatic Neoplasms epidemiology, Pulmonary Embolism epidemiology, Venous Thromboembolism complications, Venous Thromboembolism etiology
Abstract

Objective: To estimate the additional risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in men with prostate cancer compared with men without prostate cancer in Sweden., Design: Nationwide cohort study following 92 105 men with prostate cancer and 466 241 men without prostate cancer (comparison cohort) matched 5:1 by birth year and residential region., Setting: The male general population of Sweden (using the Nationwide Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden)., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Crude incidence proportion ratios (IPRs) comparing the incidence of VTE in men with prostate cancer and men in the comparison cohort. Cox regression was used to calculate HRs for VTE adjusted for confounders., Results: 2955 men with prostate cancer and 9774 men in the comparison cohort experienced a first VTE during a median of 4.5 years' follow-up. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) accounted for 52% of VTE cases in both cohorts. Median time from start of follow-up to VTE was 2.5 years (IQR 0.9-4.7) in the prostate cancer cohort and 2.9 years (IQR 1.3-5.0) in the comparison cohort. Crude incidence rates of VTE per 1000 person-years were 6.54 (95% CI 6.31 to 6.78) in the prostate cancer cohort (n=2955 events) and 4.27 (95% CI 4.18 to 4.35) in the comparison cohort (n=9774 events). The IPR decreased from 2.53 (95% CI 2.26 to 2.83) at 6 months to 1.59 (95% CI 1.52 to 1.67) at 5 years' follow-up. Adjusted HRs were 1.48 (95% CI 1.39 to 1.57) for DVT and 1.47 (95% CI 1.39 to 1.56) for pulmonary embolism after adjustment for patient characteristics., Conclusions: Swedish men with prostate cancer had a mean 50% increased risk of VTE during the 5 years following their cancer diagnosis compared with matched men free of prostate cancer. Physicians should be mindful of this marked increase in VTE risk in men with prostate cancer to help ensure timely diagnosis., Competing Interests: Competing interests: YL is an employee of Bayer AG. BF and GB were employees of Bayer AB at the time the study was carried out; GB currently works as a paid consultant for Bayer AB. PS declares that Region of Uppsala has, on behalf of National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR), made agreements on quarterly reports from Patient-Overview Prostate Cancer (part of NPCR) with Astellas, Janssen and Bayer, as well as research projects with Astellas, Bayer and Janssen. HG declares no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

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

Author

Beyer K, Moris L, Lardas M, Haire A, Barletta F, Scuderi S, Vradi E, Gandaglia G, Omar MI, MacLennan S, Zong J, Farahmand B, Maclennan SJ, Devecseri Z, Asiimwe A, Collette L, Bjartell A, Ndow J, Briganti A, and Van Hemelrijck M

Subjects
Bias, Europe, Humans, Male, Prognosis, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Prostatic Neoplasms diagnosis
Abstract

Introduction: As part of the PIONEER (Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Enhancement Through the Power of Big Data in Europe) Consortium, we will explore which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are currently being researched to previously defined clinical and patient-reported outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa)., Methods and Analysis: This research project will follow the following four steps: (1) a broad systematic literature review of DPFs for all stages of PCa, covering evidence from 2014 onwards; (2) discussion of systematic review findings by a multidisciplinary expert panel; (3) risk of bias assessment and applicability with Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool (QUIPS) and (4) additional quantitative assessments if required., Ethics and Dissemination: We aim to develop an online tool to present the DPFs identified in this research and make them available across all stakeholders. There are no ethical implications., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results