Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35290508›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

mEPE-score: a comprehensive grading system for predicting pathologic extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer at multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Marco Gatti, Riccardo Faletti, Francesco Gentile, Enrico Soncin, Giorgio Calleris, Alberto Fornari, Marco Oderda, Alessandro Serafini, Giulio Antonino Strazzarino, Elena Vissio and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Prognostic significance of the mEPE score in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing ultrahypofractionated robotic SBRT.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Effect of preoperative PI-RADS assessment on pathological outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Marco Gatti *Department of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy. marcogatti17@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8168-5280
Riccardo Faletti *Department of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Francesco GentileDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Enrico SoncinDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Giorgio CallerisUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Alberto FornariRadiology Unit, Mauriziano Umberto I Hospital, 10128, Turin, Italy.
Marco OderdaUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Alessandro SerafiniDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Giulio Antonino StrazzarinoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Elena VissioPathology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Laura BergamascoDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Stefano CirilloRadiology Unit, Mauriziano Umberto I Hospital, 10128, Turin, Italy.
Mauro Giulio PapottiPathology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Paolo GonteroUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Paolo FonioDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
University of Turin · ITDepartment of Medical Sciences · BY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the PI-RADS v2.1 multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) features in predicting extraprostatic extension (mEPE) of prostate cancer (PCa), as well as to develop and validate a comprehensive mpMRI-derived score (mEPE-score).

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients admitted to two institutions for radical prostatectomy for PCa with available records of mpMRI performed between January 2015 and December 2020. Data from one institution was used for investigating diagnostic performance of each mEPE feature using radical prostatectomy specimens as benchmark. The results were implemented in a mEPE-score as follows: no mEPE features: 1; capsular abutment: 2; irregular or spiculated margin: 3; bulging prostatic contour, or asymmetry of the neurovascular bundles, or tumor-capsule interface > 1.0 cm: 4; ≥ 2 of the previous three parameters or measurable extraprostatic disease: 5. The performance of mEPE features was evaluated using the five diagnostic parameters and ROC curve analysis.

resultsTwo-hundred patients were enrolled at site 1 and 76 at site 2. mEPE features had poor sensitivities ranging from 0.08 (0.00-0.15) to 0.71 (0.59-0.83), whereas specificity ranged from 0.68 (0.58-0.79) to 1.00. mEPE-score showed excellent discriminating ability (AUC > 0.8) and sensitivity = 0.82 and specificity = 0.77 with a threshold of 3. mEPE-score had AUC comparable to ESUR-score (p = 0.59 internal validation; p = 0.82 external validation), higher than or comparable to mEPE-grade (p = 0.04 internal validation; p = 0.58 external validation), and higher than early-and-late-EPE (p < 0.0001 internal and external validation). There were no significant differences between readers having different expertise with EPE-score (p = 0.32) or mEPE-grade (p = 0.45), but there were significant differences for ESUR-score (p = 0.02) and early-versus-late-EPE (p = 0.03).

conclusionsThe individual mEPE features have low sensitivity and high specificity. The use of mEPE-score allows for consistent and reliable assessment for pathologic EPE. KEY POINTS: • Individual PI-RADS v2.1 mpMRI features had poor sensitivities ranging from 0.08 (0.00-0.15) to 0.71 (0.59-0.83), whereas Sp ranged from 0.68 (0.58-0.79) to 1.00. • mEPE-score is an all-inclusive score for the assessment of pEPE with excellent discriminating ability (i.e., AUC > 0.8) and Se = 0.82, Sp = 0.77, PPV = 0.74, and NPV = 0.84 with a threshold of 3. • The diagnostic performance of the expert reader and beginner reader with pEPE-score was comparable (p = 0.32).

Indexed as

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstatic NeoplasmsExtracellular Matrix ProteinsGlycoproteinsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeoplasm GradingPhosphoproteinsProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesExtracellular Matrix ProteinsGlycoproteinsMEPE protein, humanPhosphoproteinsMultiparametric magnetic resonance imagingNeoplasm stagingProstatectomyProstatic neoplasmsScoring methods

Identifiers

PMID35290508
PMCPMC9213375
OpenAlexW4220810728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.