nach oben

Erschienen in:

19.04.2020 | Oncology

Independent external validation of nomogram to predict extracapsular extension in patients with prostate cancer

verfasst von: Joao Ricardo Alves, Valdair F. Muglia, Fabiano R. Lucchesi, Raisa A. O. G. Faria, Cinthia Alcantara-Quispe, Vinicius L. Vazquez, Rodolfo B. Reis, Eliney F. Faria

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 9/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

The objective of this study was to perform an independent external validation of the Giganti-Coppola nomogram (GCN), which uses clinical and radiological parameters to predict prostate extracapsular extension (ECE) on the final pathology of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP).

Material and methods

Seventy-two patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa), who were RP candidates from two institutions, were prospectively included. All patients underwent preoperative multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) at 1.5 T, without the use of an endorectal coil, with multiplanar images in T1WI, T2WI, DWI, and DCE. The AUC and a calibration graph were used to validate the nomogram, using the regression coefficients of the Giganti-Coppola study.

Results

The original nomogram had an AUC of 0.90 (p = 0.001), with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 100%, 5.1%, 47.1%, 100%, and 48%, respectively. The calibration graph showed an overestimation of the nomogram for ECE.

Conclusion

The GCN has an adequate ability in predicting ECE; however, in our sample, it showed limited accuracy and overestimated likelihood of ECE in the final pathology of patients with PCa submitted to RP.

Key Points

• Knowledge of preoperative local staging of prostate cancer is essential for surgical treatment. Extracapsular extension increases the chance of positive surgical margins.

• Imaging modalities such as mpMRI alone does not have suitable accuracy in local staging.

• Giganti-Coppola’s nomogram achieved an adequate ability in predicting ECE.

Yossepowitch O, Eggener SE, Bianco FJ Jr et al (2007) Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol 178(2):493–499 discussion 9

Zhang L, Wu B, Zha Z et al (2018) Surgical margin status and its impact on prostate cancer prognosis after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis. World J Urol 6(11):1803–1815

Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN et al (1997) Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA 277(18):1445–1451

Ohori M, Kattan MW, Koh H et al (2004) Predicting the presence and side of extracapsular extension: a nomogram for staging prostate cancer. J Urol 171(5):1844–1849 discussion 9

Smith JA Jr, Scardino PT, Resnick MI, Hernandez AD, Rose SC, Egger MJ (1997) Transrectal ultrasound versus digital rectal examination for the staging of carcinoma of the prostate: results of a prospective, multi-institutional trial. J Urol 157(3):902–906PubMedCrossRef

Steuber T, Graefen M, Haese A et al (2006) Validation of a nomogram for prediction of side specific extracapsular extension at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 175(3 Pt 1):939–944 discussion 44

Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL et al (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69(1):16–40

Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378(19):1767–1777

de Rooij M, Hamoen EH, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM (2016) Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for local staging of prostate cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 70(2):233–245PubMedCrossRef

10.

Giganti F, Coppola A, Ambrosi A et al (2016) Apparent diffusion coefficient in the evaluation of side-specific extracapsular extension in prostate cancer: development and external validation of a nomogram of clinical use. Urol Oncol 34(7):291 e9–291e17

11.

Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB et al (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 40(2):244–252

12.

Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L et al (2011) International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol 24(1):6–15

13.

Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB et al (2017) The eighth edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more “personalized” approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin 67(2):93–99

14.

Sayyid R, Perlis N, Ahmad A et al (2017) Development and external validation of a biopsy-derived nomogram to predict risk of ipsilateral extraprostatic extension. BJU Int 120(1):76–82

15.

Crippa A, Srougi M, Dall’Oglio MF et al (2006) A new nomogram to predict pathologic outcome following radical prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol 32(2):155–164

16.

Collins GS, de Groot JA, Dutton S et al (2014) External validation of multivariable prediction models: a systematic review of methodological conduct and reporting. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:40

17.

Moons KG, Kengne AP, Grobbee DE et al (2012) Risk prediction models: II. External validation, model updating, and impact assessment. Heart 98(9):691–698

18.

Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KG (2015) Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. Br J Surg 102(3):148–158PubMedCrossRef

19.

Lughezzani G, Briganti A, Karakiewicz PI et al (2010) Predictive and prognostic models in radical prostatectomy candidates: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol 58(5):687–700

20.

Augustin H, Fritz GA, Ehammer T, Auprich M, Pummer K (2009) Accuracy of 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging for the staging of prostate cancer in comparison to the Partin tables. Acta Radiol 50(5):562–569PubMedCrossRef

21.

Gupta RT, Faridi KF, Singh AA et al (2014) Comparing 3-T multiparametric MRI and the Partin tables to predict organ-confined prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 32(8):1292–1299

22.

Tay KJ, Gupta RT, Brown AF, Silverman RK, Polascik TJ (2016) Defining the incremental utility of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at standard and specialized read in predicting extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 70(2):211–213PubMedCrossRef

23.

Feng TS, Sharif-Afshar AR, Wu J et al (2015) Multiparametric MRI improves accuracy of clinical nomograms for predicting extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. Urology 86(2):332–337

24.

Jansen BHE, Nieuwenhuijzen JA, Oprea-Lager DE et al (2019) Adding multiparametric MRI to the MSKCC and Partin nomograms for primary prostate cancer: Improving local tumor staging? Urol Oncol 37(3):181 e1–e6

25.

Weaver JK, Kim EH, Vetter JM et al (2018) Prostate magnetic resonance imaging provides limited incremental value over the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center preradical prostatectomy nomogram. Urology 113:119–128

26.

Martini A, Gupta A, Lewis SC et al (2018) Development and internal validation of a side-specific, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-based nomogram for the prediction of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. BJU Int 122(6):1025–1033

27.

Ma S, Xie H, Wang H et al (2019) MRI-based radiomics signature for the preoperative prediction of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 50(6):1914–1925

28.

Kim CK, Park SY, Park JJ, Park BK (2014) Diffusion-weighted MRI as a predictor of extracapsular extension in prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202(3):W270–W276PubMedCrossRef

29.

Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389(10071):815–822

Titel: Independent external validation of nomogram to predict extracapsular extension in patients with prostate cancer
verfasst von: Joao Ricardo Alves
Valdair F. Muglia
Fabiano R. Lucchesi
Raisa A. O. G. Faria
Cinthia Alcantara-Quispe
Vinicius L. Vazquez
Rodolfo B. Reis
Eliney F. Faria
Publikationsdatum: 19.04.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 9/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06839-0

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Independent external validation of nomogram to predict extracapsular extension in patients with prostate cancer