TY - JOUR
T1 - External Validation and Addition of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography to the Most Frequently Used Nomograms for the Prediction of Pelvic Lymph-node Metastases: an International Multicenter Study
T2 - an International Multicenter Study
AU - Meijer, Dennie
AU - van Leeuwen, Pim J.
AU - Roberts, Matthew J.
AU - Siriwardana, Amila R.
AU - Morton, Andrew
AU - Yaxley, John W.
AU - Samaratunga, Hemamali
AU - Emmett, Louise
AU - van de Ven, Peter M.
AU - van der Poel, Henk G.
AU - Donswijk, Maarten L.
AU - Boellaard, Thierry N.
AU - Schoots, Ivo G.
AU - Oprea-Lager, Daniela E.
AU - Coughlin, Geoffrey D.
AU - Vis, André N.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s)
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/8
Y1 - 2021/8
N2 - Background: Different nomograms exist for the preoperative prediction of pelvic lymph-node metastatic disease in individual patients with prostate cancer (PCa). These nomograms do not incorporate modern imaging techniques such as prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET). Objective: To determine the predictive performance of the Briganti 2017, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), and Briganti 2019 nomograms with the addition of PSMA-PET in an international, multicenter, present-day cohort of patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and extended pelvic lymph-node dissection (ePLND) for localized PCa. Design, setting, and participants: All 757 eligible patients who underwent a PSMA-PET prior to RARP and ePLND in three reference centers for PCa surgery between January 2016 and November 2020 were included. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Performance of the three nomograms was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic curve–derived area under the curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analyses. Subsequently, recalibration and addition of PSMA-PET to the nomograms were performed. Results and limitations: Overall, 186/757 patients (25%) had pelvic lymph-node metastatic (pN1) disease on histopathological examination. AUCs of the Briganti 2017, MSKCC, and Briganti 2019 nomograms were 0.70 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.64–0.77), 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.71–0.82), respectively. PSMA-PET findings showed a significant association with pN1 disease when added to the nomograms (p < 0.001). Addition of PSMA-PET substantially improved the discriminative ability of the models yielding cross-validated AUCs of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70–0.82), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72–0.83), and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76–0.87), respectively. In decision curve analyses, the addition of PSMA-PET to the three nomograms resulted in increased net benefits. Conclusions: The addition of PSMA-PET to the previously developed nomograms showed substantially improved predictive performance, which suggests that PSMA-PET is a likely future candidate for a modern predictive nomogram. Patient summary: Different tools have been developed to individualize the prediction of prostate cancer spread to lymph nodes before surgery. We found that the inclusion of modern imaging (prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography) improved substantially the overall performance of these prediction tools.
AB - Background: Different nomograms exist for the preoperative prediction of pelvic lymph-node metastatic disease in individual patients with prostate cancer (PCa). These nomograms do not incorporate modern imaging techniques such as prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET). Objective: To determine the predictive performance of the Briganti 2017, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), and Briganti 2019 nomograms with the addition of PSMA-PET in an international, multicenter, present-day cohort of patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and extended pelvic lymph-node dissection (ePLND) for localized PCa. Design, setting, and participants: All 757 eligible patients who underwent a PSMA-PET prior to RARP and ePLND in three reference centers for PCa surgery between January 2016 and November 2020 were included. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Performance of the three nomograms was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic curve–derived area under the curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analyses. Subsequently, recalibration and addition of PSMA-PET to the nomograms were performed. Results and limitations: Overall, 186/757 patients (25%) had pelvic lymph-node metastatic (pN1) disease on histopathological examination. AUCs of the Briganti 2017, MSKCC, and Briganti 2019 nomograms were 0.70 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.64–0.77), 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.71–0.82), respectively. PSMA-PET findings showed a significant association with pN1 disease when added to the nomograms (p < 0.001). Addition of PSMA-PET substantially improved the discriminative ability of the models yielding cross-validated AUCs of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70–0.82), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72–0.83), and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76–0.87), respectively. In decision curve analyses, the addition of PSMA-PET to the three nomograms resulted in increased net benefits. Conclusions: The addition of PSMA-PET to the previously developed nomograms showed substantially improved predictive performance, which suggests that PSMA-PET is a likely future candidate for a modern predictive nomogram. Patient summary: Different tools have been developed to individualize the prediction of prostate cancer spread to lymph nodes before surgery. We found that the inclusion of modern imaging (prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography) improved substantially the overall performance of these prediction tools.
KW - Extended pelvic lymph-node dissection
KW - Lymph-node metastases
KW - Nomograms
KW - Prostate cancer
KW - Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography imaging
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85106372471&origin=inward
UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34024652
U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.006
DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 34024652
SN - 0302-2838
VL - 80
SP - 234
EP - 242
JO - European Urology
JF - European Urology
IS - 2
ER -