An updated model for predicting side-specific extraprostatic extension in the era of MRI-targeted biopsy.

Journal

Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases

ISSN: 1476-5608

Titre abrégé: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

Pays: England

ID NLM: 9815755

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
05 Jan 2024

Historique:

received: 03 09 2023

accepted: 01 12 2023

revised: 26 11 2023

medline: 6 1 2024

pubmed: 6 1 2024

entrez: 5 1 2024

Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Accurate prediction of extraprostatic extension (EPE) is pivotal for surgical planning. Herein, we aimed to provide an updated model for predicting EPE among patients diagnosed with MRI-targeted biopsy. We analyzed a multi-institutional dataset of men with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed by MRI-targeted biopsy and subsequently underwent prostatectomy. To develop a side-specific predictive model, we considered the prostatic lobes separately. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was fitted to predict side-specific EPE. The decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the net clinical benefit. Finally, a regression tree was employed to identify three risk categories to assist urologists in selecting candidates for nerve-sparing, incremental nerve sparing and non-nerve-sparing surgery. Overall, data from 3169 hemi-prostates were considered, after the exclusion of prostatic lobes with no biopsy-documented tumor. EPE was present on final pathology in 1,094 (34%) cases. Among these, MRI was able to predict EPE correctly in 568 (52%) cases. A model including PSA, maximum diameter of the index lesion, presence of EPE on MRI, highest ISUP grade in the ipsilateral hemi-prostate, and percentage of positive cores in the ipsilateral hemi-prostate achieved an AUC of 81% after internal validation. Overall, 566, 577, and 2,026 observations fell in the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups for EPE, as identified by the regression tree. The EPE rate across the groups was: 5.1%, 14.9%, and 48% for the low-, intermediate- and high-risk group, respectively. In this study we present an update of the first side-specific MRI-based nomogram for the prediction of extraprostatic extension together with updated risk categories to help clinicians in deciding on the best approach to nerve-preservation.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1038/s41391-023-00776-x PMID: 38182804

pubmed: 38182804

doi: 10.1038/s41391-023-00776-x

pii: 10.1038/s41391-023-00776-x

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Informations de copyright

Références

Martini A, Falagario UG, Villers A, Dell’Oglio P, Mazzone E, Autorino R, et al. Contemporary techniques of prostate dissection for robot-assisted prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2020;78:583–91.

doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.07.017 pubmed: 32747200

Ficarra V, Borghesi M, Suardi N, De Naeyer G, Novara G, Schatteman P, et al. Long-term evaluation of survival, continence and potency (SCP) outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int. 2013;112:338–45.

doi: 10.1111/bju.12001 pubmed: 23470027

Suardi N, Moschini M, Gallina A, Gandaglia G, Abdollah F, Capitanio U, et al. Nerve-sparing approach during radical prostatectomy is strongly associated with the rate of postoperative urinary continence recovery. BJU Int. 2013;111:717–22.

doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11315.x pubmed: 22726993

Martini A, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Scuderi S, Bravi CA, Mazzone E, et al. Defining clinically meaningful positive surgical margins in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:42–8.

Martini A, Marqueen KE, Falagario UG, Waingankar N, Wajswol E, Khan F, et al. Estimated costs associated with radiation therapy for positive surgical margins during radical prostatectomy. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3:e201913.

doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1913 pubmed: 32232450 pmcid: 7109597

Martini A, Mottet N, Montorsi F, Necchi A, Ribal MJ, Malavaud B. A plea for economically sustainable evidence-based guidelines. Eur Urol. 2022;82:449–51.

doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.08.001 pubmed: 35999118

Kozikowski M, Malewski W, Michalak W, Dobruch J. Clinical utility of MRI in the decision-making process before radical prostatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0210194.

doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210194 pubmed: 30615661 pmcid: 6322775

Martini A, Gupta A, Lewis SC, Cumarasamy S, Haines KG 3rd, Briganti A, et al. 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. 2018;122:1025–33.

doi: 10.1111/bju.14353 pubmed: 29676063

Soeterik TFW, van Melick HHE, Dijksman LM, Kusters-Vandevelde H, Stomps S, Schoots IG, et al. Development and external validation of a novel nomogram to predict side-specific extraprostatic extension in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Oncol. 2020.

Nyarangi-Dix J, Wiesenfarth M, Bonekamp D, Hitthaler B, Schutz V, Dieffenbacher S, et al. Combined clinical parameters and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of extraprostatic disease-A risk model for patient-tailored risk stratification when planning radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2020;6:1205–12.

doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.11.004 pubmed: 30477971

Barentsz JO, Weinreb JC, Verma S, Thoeny HC, Tempany CM, Shtern F, et al. Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 guidelines for multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging and recommendations for use. Eur Urol. 2016;69:41–9.

doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.038 pubmed: 26361169

Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radio. 2012;22:746–57.

doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2377-y

Ohori M, Kattan MW, Koh H, Maru N, Slawin KM, Shariat S, et al. Predicting the presence and side of extracapsular extension: a nomogram for staging prostate cancer. J Urol. 2004;171:1844–9.

doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000121693.05077.3d pubmed: 15076291

Martini A, Wever L, Soeterik TFW, Rakauskas A, Fankhauser CD, Grogg JB, et al. Unilateral pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer patients diagnosed in the era of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy: a study that challenges the Dogma. J Urol. 2023;210:117–27.

doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003442 pubmed: 37052480

Srivastava A, Chopra S, Pham A, Sooriakumaran P, Durand M, Chughtai B, et al. Effect of a risk-stratified grade of nerve-sparing technique on early return of continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;63:438–44.

doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.009 pubmed: 22901982

Martini A, Cumarasamy S, Haines KG III, Tewari AK. An updated approach to incremental nerve sparing for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2019;124:103–8.

doi: 10.1111/bju.14655 pubmed: 30575261

Martini A, Tewari AK. Anatomic robotic prostatectomy: current best practice. Ther Adv Urol. 2019;11:1756287218813789.

doi: 10.1177/1756287218813789 pubmed: 30671135 pmcid: 6329013

Martini A, Soeterik TFW, Haverdings H, Rahota RG, Checcucci E, De Cillis S, et al. An algorithm to personalize nerve sparing in men with unilateral high-risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2022;207:350–7.

doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002205 pubmed: 34547922

Dinneen EP, Van Der Slot M, Adasonla K, Tan J, Grierson J, Haider A, et al. Intraoperative frozen section for margin evaluation during radical prostatectomy: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol Focus. 2020;6:664–73.

doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.11.009 pubmed: 31787570

van der Slot MA, den Bakker MA, Tan TSC, Remmers S, Busstra MB, Gan M, et al. NeuroSAFE in radical prostatectomy increases the rate of nerve-sparing surgery without affecting oncological outcome. BJU Int. 2022;130:628–36.

doi: 10.1111/bju.15771 pubmed: 35536200 pmcid: 9796592

Diamand R, Roche JB, Lievore E, Lacetera V, Chiacchio G, Beatrici V, et al. External validation of models for prediction of side-specific extracapsular extension in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2023;9:309–16.

doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.09.006 pubmed: 36153227

Pak S, Park S, Ryu J, Hong S, Song SH, You D, et al. Preoperative factors predictive of posterolateral extracapsular extension after radical prostatectomy. Korean J Urol. 2013;54:824–9.

doi: 10.4111/kju.2013.54.12.824 pubmed: 24363862 pmcid: 3866284

Patel VR, Sandri M, Grasso AAC, De Lorenzis E, Palmisano F, Albo G, et al. A novel tool for predicting extracapsular extension during graded partial nerve sparing in radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2018;121:373–82.

doi: 10.1111/bju.14026 pubmed: 28941058

Valerio M, Anele C, Freeman A, Jameson C, Singh PB, Hu Y, et al. Identifying the index lesion with template prostate mapping biopsies. J Urol. 2015;193:1185–90.

doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.11.015 pubmed: 25463987

Nassiri N, Chang E, Lieu P, Priester AM, Margolis DJA, Huang J, et al. Focal therapy eligibility determined by magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. J Urol. 2018;199:453–8.

doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.085 pubmed: 28830754

Beksac AT, Cumarasamy S, Falagario U, Xu P, Takhar M, Alshalalfa M, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging features identify aggressive prostate cancer at the phenotypic and transcriptomic level. J Urol. 2018;200:1241–9.

doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.06.041 pubmed: 30563651