1.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
2.Safety and Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation for Superficial Parotid Pleomorphic Adenoma
Chih-Ying LEE ; Wei-Che LIN ; Sheng-Dean LUO ; Pi-Ling CHIANG ; An-Ni LIN ; Cheng-Kang WANG ; Chun-Yuan CHAO
Korean Journal of Radiology 2025;26(5):460-470
Objective:
To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA).
Materials and Methods:
From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups.
Results:
In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000).
Conclusion
RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.
3.Safety and Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation for Superficial Parotid Pleomorphic Adenoma
Chih-Ying LEE ; Wei-Che LIN ; Sheng-Dean LUO ; Pi-Ling CHIANG ; An-Ni LIN ; Cheng-Kang WANG ; Chun-Yuan CHAO
Korean Journal of Radiology 2025;26(5):460-470
Objective:
To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA).
Materials and Methods:
From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups.
Results:
In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000).
Conclusion
RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.
4.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
5.Safety and Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation for Superficial Parotid Pleomorphic Adenoma
Chih-Ying LEE ; Wei-Che LIN ; Sheng-Dean LUO ; Pi-Ling CHIANG ; An-Ni LIN ; Cheng-Kang WANG ; Chun-Yuan CHAO
Korean Journal of Radiology 2025;26(5):460-470
Objective:
To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA).
Materials and Methods:
From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups.
Results:
In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000).
Conclusion
RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.
6.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
7.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.
8.Safety and Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation for Superficial Parotid Pleomorphic Adenoma
Chih-Ying LEE ; Wei-Che LIN ; Sheng-Dean LUO ; Pi-Ling CHIANG ; An-Ni LIN ; Cheng-Kang WANG ; Chun-Yuan CHAO
Korean Journal of Radiology 2025;26(5):460-470
Objective:
To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA).
Materials and Methods:
From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups.
Results:
In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000).
Conclusion
RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.
9.Safety and Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation for Superficial Parotid Pleomorphic Adenoma
Chih-Ying LEE ; Wei-Che LIN ; Sheng-Dean LUO ; Pi-Ling CHIANG ; An-Ni LIN ; Cheng-Kang WANG ; Chun-Yuan CHAO
Korean Journal of Radiology 2025;26(5):460-470
Objective:
To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA).
Materials and Methods:
From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups.
Results:
In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000).
Conclusion
RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.
10.Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Urine Metabolomics via Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry
Chung-Hsin CHEN ; Hsiang-Po HUANG ; Kai-Hsiung CHANG ; Ming-Shyue LEE ; Cheng-Fan LEE ; Chih-Yu LIN ; Yuan Chi LIN ; William J. HUANG ; Chun-Hou LIAO ; Chih-Chin YU ; Shiu-Dong CHUNG ; Yao-Chou TSAI ; Chia-Chang WU ; Chen-Hsun HO ; Pei-Wen HSIAO ; Yeong-Shiau PU ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):376-386
Purpose:
Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles.
Materials and Methods:
Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion.
Results:
The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column.
Conclusions
Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail