Clinical parameters for the prediction of occult lymph node metastasis in patients with negative PSMA-PET.

Lymphnode dissection Lymphnode metastasis PSMA ligand PSMA-PET Prostate cancer

Journal

Urologic oncology
ISSN: 1873-2496
Titre abrégé: Urol Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9805460

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 23 08 2023
revised: 30 11 2023
accepted: 31 12 2023
medline: 22 1 2024
pubmed: 22 1 2024
entrez: 21 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Depending on the risk of LN metastasis ePLND at RP is recommended. As ePLND has potential side effects, and diagnostics have improved substantially, our objective was to evaluate the performance of the Briganti 2019 nomogram in a contemporary cohort with preoperative negative PSMA-PET. Patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (CaP), undergoing RP and ePND at our center with preoperative negative [ The study included 108 patients, 28% intermediate- and 72% high-risk. Twelve patients harbored occult LN metastasis. Accuracy of the nomogram was 0.62. [ The currently used nomogram is suboptimal in detecting patients with occult LNM. While the cut-off value to perform ePLND can be increased slightly following a negative PSMA-PET scan, more accurate methods of identifying these patients are needed. Whether ePLND can have a therapeutic benefit, as opposed to a diagnostic only, needs to be re-evaluated in the PSMA-PET era.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Depending on the risk of LN metastasis ePLND at RP is recommended. As ePLND has potential side effects, and diagnostics have improved substantially, our objective was to evaluate the performance of the Briganti 2019 nomogram in a contemporary cohort with preoperative negative PSMA-PET.
METHODS METHODS
Patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (CaP), undergoing RP and ePND at our center with preoperative negative [
RESULTS RESULTS
The study included 108 patients, 28% intermediate- and 72% high-risk. Twelve patients harbored occult LN metastasis. Accuracy of the nomogram was 0.62. [
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The currently used nomogram is suboptimal in detecting patients with occult LNM. While the cut-off value to perform ePLND can be increased slightly following a negative PSMA-PET scan, more accurate methods of identifying these patients are needed. Whether ePLND can have a therapeutic benefit, as opposed to a diagnostic only, needs to be re-evaluated in the PSMA-PET era.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38246806
pii: S1078-1439(24)00001-2
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.12.016
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Auteurs

Nicolai A Huebner (NA)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Working Group for Diagnostic imaging in Urology (ABDU), Austrian Association of Urology (ÖGU), Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: Nicolai.huebner@meduniwien.ac.at.

Gabriel Wasinger (G)

Department of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Pawel Rajwa (P)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland.

Irene Resch (I)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Stephan Korn (S)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Sazan Rasul (S)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image guided Therapy, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Pascal Baltzer (P)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Larissa Prüger (L)

Department of Urology, Hospital Weinviertel Korneuburg, Korneuburg, Austria.

Andreas Rauschmeier (A)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Christian Seitz (C)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Working Group for Diagnostic imaging in Urology (ABDU), Austrian Association of Urology (ÖGU), Vienna, Austria.

Eva Comperat (E)

Department of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Shahrokh F Shariat (SF)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Department of Urology and Division of Medical Oncology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan.

Bernhard Grubmüller (B)

Department of Urology and Andrology, University Hospital Krems, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria.

Classifications MeSH