Supplementary Methods, Table S1, Figures S1-7 from Development and Clinical Validation of an <i>In Situ</i> Biopsy-Based Multimarker Assay for Risk Stratification in Prostate Cancer

Abstract

<p>Supplementary Methods, Table S1, Figures S1-7. Methods for quantitative multiplex proteomics imaging (QMPI) Clinical studies: Statistical plan Table S1. Clinical Validation Study. Comparison of Predictive Value of the 8-Biomarker Assay for Favorable Pathology with D'Amico Risk Categories. Figure S1. Outline of all four quantitative multiplex immunofluorescence triplex assay formats Figure S2. Clinical validation study, full cohort (N=276): performance for "GS 6" pathology (surgical Gleason =3+3 and localized {less than or equal to}T3a). A) Sensitivity (P[risk score> threshold| "non-GS 6" pathology]) of the assay, as a function of medical decision level. Figure S3. Clinical validation study, full cohort (N=274): performance for prediction of favorable pathology (surgical Gleason {less than or equal to}3+4 and organ-confined {less than or equal to}T2). Figure S4. Clinical validation study, Subset of validation cohort that contained sufficient annotation for National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and D'Amico categorization (N=256) Figure S5. Clinical validation study: performance for prediction of favorable pathology. Figure S6. Net Reclassification Index analysis illustrates how biomarker assay categories of favorable (risk score {less than or equal to}0·33) and non-favorable (risk score >0·8) may supplement NCCN Figure S7. Decision Curve Analysis provides another method for characterizing performance of different risk systems and at different cut points.</p>