Cargando…

Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer

Purpose: To identify effective factors predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: This retrospective cohort study recruited 898 consecutive patients with PCa treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The patients were divided into...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, See Hyung, Cho, Seung Hyun, Kim, Won Hwa, Kim, Hye Jung, Park, Jong Min, Kim, Gab Chul, Ryeom, Hun Kyu, Yoon, Yu Sung, Cha, Jung Guen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10455404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37629363
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165321
_version_ 1785096442705084416
author Kim, See Hyung
Cho, Seung Hyun
Kim, Won Hwa
Kim, Hye Jung
Park, Jong Min
Kim, Gab Chul
Ryeom, Hun Kyu
Yoon, Yu Sung
Cha, Jung Guen
author_facet Kim, See Hyung
Cho, Seung Hyun
Kim, Won Hwa
Kim, Hye Jung
Park, Jong Min
Kim, Gab Chul
Ryeom, Hun Kyu
Yoon, Yu Sung
Cha, Jung Guen
author_sort Kim, See Hyung
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To identify effective factors predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: This retrospective cohort study recruited 898 consecutive patients with PCa treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The patients were divided into EPE and non-EPE groups based on the analysis of whole-mount histopathologic sections. Histopathological analysis (ISUP biopsy grade group) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (PI-RADS v2.1 scores [1–5] and the Mehralivand EPE grade [0–3]) were used to assess the prediction of EPE. We also assessed the clinical usefulness of the prediction model based on decision-curve analysis. Results: Of 800 included patients, 235 (29.3%) had EPE, and 565 patients (70.7%) did not (non-EPE). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the biopsy ISUP grade, PI-RADS v2.1 score, and Mehralivand EPE grade were independent risk factors for EPE. In the regression assessment of the models, the best discrimination (area under the curve of 0.879) was obtained using the basic model (age, serum PSA, prostate volume at MRI, positive biopsy core, clinical T stage, and D’Amico risk group) and Mehralivand EPE grade 3. Decision-curve analysis showed that combining Mehralivand EPE grade 3 with the basic model resulted in superior net benefits for predicting EPE. Conclusion: Mehralivand EPE grades and PI-RADS v2.1 scores, in addition to basic clinical and demographic information, are potentially useful for predicting EPE in patients with PCa.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10455404
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104554042023-08-26 Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer Kim, See Hyung Cho, Seung Hyun Kim, Won Hwa Kim, Hye Jung Park, Jong Min Kim, Gab Chul Ryeom, Hun Kyu Yoon, Yu Sung Cha, Jung Guen J Clin Med Article Purpose: To identify effective factors predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: This retrospective cohort study recruited 898 consecutive patients with PCa treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The patients were divided into EPE and non-EPE groups based on the analysis of whole-mount histopathologic sections. Histopathological analysis (ISUP biopsy grade group) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (PI-RADS v2.1 scores [1–5] and the Mehralivand EPE grade [0–3]) were used to assess the prediction of EPE. We also assessed the clinical usefulness of the prediction model based on decision-curve analysis. Results: Of 800 included patients, 235 (29.3%) had EPE, and 565 patients (70.7%) did not (non-EPE). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the biopsy ISUP grade, PI-RADS v2.1 score, and Mehralivand EPE grade were independent risk factors for EPE. In the regression assessment of the models, the best discrimination (area under the curve of 0.879) was obtained using the basic model (age, serum PSA, prostate volume at MRI, positive biopsy core, clinical T stage, and D’Amico risk group) and Mehralivand EPE grade 3. Decision-curve analysis showed that combining Mehralivand EPE grade 3 with the basic model resulted in superior net benefits for predicting EPE. Conclusion: Mehralivand EPE grades and PI-RADS v2.1 scores, in addition to basic clinical and demographic information, are potentially useful for predicting EPE in patients with PCa. MDPI 2023-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10455404/ /pubmed/37629363 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165321 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Kim, See Hyung
Cho, Seung Hyun
Kim, Won Hwa
Kim, Hye Jung
Park, Jong Min
Kim, Gab Chul
Ryeom, Hun Kyu
Yoon, Yu Sung
Cha, Jung Guen
Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer
title Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer
title_full Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer
title_fullStr Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer
title_short Predictors of Extraprostatic Extension in Patients with Prostate Cancer
title_sort predictors of extraprostatic extension in patients with prostate cancer
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10455404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37629363
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165321
work_keys_str_mv AT kimseehyung predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT choseunghyun predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT kimwonhwa predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT kimhyejung predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT parkjongmin predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT kimgabchul predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT ryeomhunkyu predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT yoonyusung predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer
AT chajungguen predictorsofextraprostaticextensioninpatientswithprostatecancer