Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement with Prostate Cancer Nomograms: Can We Trust the Prediction Models?

Author:

Chavarriaga Julian1ORCID,Barco-Castillo Catalina2,Santander Jessica2,Zuluaga Laura2,Medina Camilo2,Trujillo Carlos2,Plata Mauricio2,Caicedo Juan Ignacio2

Affiliation:

1. Division of Urology, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia

2. Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario, Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Prediction of lymph node involvement (LNI) is of paramount importance for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). Multiple statistical models predicting LNI have been developed to support clinical decision-making regarding the need of extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND). Our aim is to evaluate the prediction ability of the best-performing prediction tools for LNI in PCa in a Latin-American population. Methods Clinicopathological data of 830 patients with PCa who underwent RP and ePLND between 2007 and 2018 was obtained. Only data from patients who had ≥ 10 lymph nodes (LNs) harvested were included (n = 576 patients). Four prediction models were validated using this cohort: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) web calculator, Briganti v.2017, Yale formula and Partin tables v.2016. The performance of the prediction tools was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). Results The median age was 61 years old (interquartile range [IQR] 56–66), the median Prostate specific antigen (PSA) was 6,81 ng/mL (IQR 4,8–10,1) and the median of LNs harvested was 17 (IQR 13–23), and LNI was identified in 53 patients (9.3%). Predictions from the 2017 Briganti nomogram AUC (0.85) and the Yale formula AUC (0.85) were the most accurate; MSKCC and 2016 Partin tables AUC were both 0,84. Conclusion There was no significant difference in the performance of the four validated prediction tools in a Latin-American population compared with the European or North American patients in whom these tools have been validated. Among the 4 models, the Briganti v.2017 and Yale formula yielded the best results, but the AUC overlapped with the other validated models.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Urology

Reference32 articles.

1. Cancer risk management in Colombia, 2016;P Ramírez-Barbosa;Colomb Med (Cali),2018

2. Changes in initial treatment for prostate cancer among Medicare beneficiaries, 1999-2007;M A Dinan;Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2012

3. Contemporary Trends in Radical Prostatectomy in the United States: Open vs Minimally Invasive Surgery;D Dalela;Mayo Clin Proc,2016

4. Temporal national trends of minimally invasive and retropubic radical prostatectomy outcomes from 2003 to 2007: results from the 100% Medicare sample;K J Kowalczyk;Eur Urol,2012

5. Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy: do the risks outweigh the benefits?;S Loeb;Rev Urol,2010

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3