Home  |   Archive  |   Online Submission  |   News & Events  |   Subscribe  |   APFA  |   Society  |   Contact Us  |   中文版

Ahead of print
Authors' Accepted
Current Issue
Special Issues
Browse by Category

Manuscript Submission

Online Submission
Online Review
Instruction for Authors
Instruction for Reviewers
English Corner new!

About AJA

About AJA
Editorial Board
Contact Us

Resources & Services

Email alert

Download area

Copyright licence
EndNote style file
Manuscript word template
Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in English)

Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in Chinese)

Proof-reading for the

AJA Club (in English)
AJA Club (in Chinese)


Volume 25, Issue 2 (March 2023) 25, 265–270; 10.4103/aja202249

Comparison of the predictive value of anthropometric indicators for the risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia in southern China

Meng-Jun Huang1, Yan-Yi Yang2, Can Chen1, Rui-Xiang Luo1, Chu-Qi Wen1, Yang Li1, Ling-Peng Zeng1, Xiang-Yang Li1, Zhuo Yin1

1 Department of Urology, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha 410011, China
2 Health Management Center, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha 410011, China

Correspondence: Dr. Z Yin (yinzhuo@csu.edu.cn)

Received: 01 March 2022; Accepted: 24 June 2022; published online: 19 August 2022


This study aimed to compare the predictive value of six selected anthropometric indicators for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Males over 50 years of age who underwent health examinations at the Health Management Center of the Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University (Changsha, China) from June to December 2020 were enrolled in this study. The characteristic data were collected, including basic anthropometric indices, lipid parameters, six anthropometric indicators, prostate-specific antigen, and total prostate volume. The odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for all anthropometric parameters and BPH were calculated using binary logistic regression. To assess the diagnostic capability of each indicator for BPH and identify the appropriate cutoff values, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the related areas under the curves (AUCs) were utilized. All six indicators had diagnostic value for BPH (all P ≤ 0.001). The visceral adiposity index (VAI; AUC: 0.797, 95% CI: 0.759–0.834) had the highest AUC and therefore the highest diagnostic value. This was followed by the cardiometabolic index (CMI; AUC: 0.792, 95% CI: 0.753–0.831), lipid accumulation product (LAP; AUC: 0.766, 95% CI: 0.723–0.809), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR; AUC: 0.660, 95% CI: 0.609–0.712), waist-to-height ratio (WHtR; AUC: 0.639, 95% CI: 0.587–0.691), and body mass index (BMI; AUC: 0.592, 95% CI: 0.540–0.643). The sensitivity of CMI was the highest (92.1%), and WHtR had the highest specificity of 94.1%. CMI consistently showed the highest OR in the binary logistic regression analysis. BMI, WHtR, WHR, VAI, CMI, and LAP all influence the occurrence of BPH in middle-aged and older men (all P ≤ 0.001), and CMI is the best predictor of BPH.

Keywords: benign prostate hyperplasia; obesity index; predictive value; risk prediction

Full Text | PDF |

Browse:  33
Asian Journal of Andrology CN 31-1795/R ISSN 1008-682X  Copyright © 2023  Shanghai Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences.  All rights reserved.