Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38182804›Full record

ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2024

An updated model for predicting side-specific extraprostatic extension in the era of MRI-targeted biopsy.

Alberto Martini, Lieke Wever, Timo F W Soeterik, Arnas Rakauskas, Christian Daniel Fankhauser, Josias Bastian Grogg, Enrico Checcucci, Daniele Amparore, Luciano Haiquel, Lara Rodriguez-Sanchez and 33 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

43 authors at 18 institutions in 9 countries.

Alberto MartiniDepartment of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Toulouse, France. a.martini.md@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-1272-7154
Lieke WeverSt. Antonius ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Timo F W SoeterikSt. Antonius ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Arnas RakauskasDepartment of Urology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Christian Daniel FankhauserDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Josias Bastian GroggDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Enrico CheccucciDepartment of Urology, San Luigi Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Daniele AmparoreDepartment of Urology, San Luigi Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Luciano HaiquelDepartment of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Lara Rodriguez-SanchezDepartment of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Guillaume PloussardDepartment of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Toulouse, France.
Peng QiangSH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Andres AffentrangerDepartment of Urology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Alessandro MarquisDepartment of Urology, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Giancarlo MarraDepartment of Urology, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Otto EttalaDepartment of Urology, Turku University, Turku, Finland.
Fabio ZattoniUrology Unit, Academical Medical Centre Hospital, Udine, Italy.
Ugo Giovanni FalagarioDepartment of Urology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Mario De AngelisUnit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Claudia KeschDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Maria ApfelbeckDepartment of Urology, LMU, Munich, Germany.
Tarek Al-HammouriDepartment of Urology, University College London and University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alexander KretschmerDepartment of Urology, LMU, Munich, Germany.
Veeru KasivisvanathanDepartment of Urology, University College London and University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Felix PreisserDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Emilie LefebvreDepartment of Urology, CHU Lille, Lille, France.
Jonathan OlivierDepartment of Urology, CHU Lille, Lille, France.
Jan Philipp RadtkeDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Giuseppe CarrieriDepartment of Urology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.
Fabrizio Dal MoroUrology Unit, Academical Medical Centre Hospital, Udine, Italy.
Peter BoströmDepartment of Urology, Turku University, Turku, Finland.
Ivan JamborDepartment of Urology, Turku University, Turku, Finland.
Paolo GonteroDepartment of Urology, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Peter K ChiuSH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Hubert JohnDepartment of Urology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Petr MacekDepartment of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Francesco PorpigliaDepartment of Urology, San Luigi Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Thomas HermannsDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Roderick C N van den BerghSt. Antonius ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Jean-Paul A van BastenSt. Antonius ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Giorgio GandagliaUnit of Urology/Division of Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Massimo ValerioDepartment of Urology, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland. massimo.valerio@hcuge.ch.
Young Academic Urologists working group on Prostate Cancer of the European Association of Urology
St. Antonius Ziekenhuis · NLAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria San Giovanni Battista · ITInstitute Mutualiste Montsouris · FRUniversity of Turku · FIUniversity of Zurich · CHCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRChinese University of Hong Kong · HKEssen University Hospital · DEKantonsspital Winterthur · CHLMU Klinikum · DELyon Genou Centre Albert Trillat · FRUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Foggia · ITUniversity of Padua · ITVita-Salute San Raffaele University · ITGoethe University Frankfurt · DEUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CHUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAccurate prediction of extraprostatic extension (EPE) is pivotal for surgical planning. Herein, we aimed to provide an updated model for predicting EPE among patients diagnosed with MRI-targeted biopsy. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe analyzed a multi-institutional dataset of men with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed by MRI-targeted biopsy and subsequently underwent prostatectomy. To develop a side-specific predictive model, we considered the prostatic lobes separately. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was fitted to predict side-specific EPE. The decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the net clinical benefit. Finally, a regression tree was employed to identify three risk categories to assist urologists in selecting candidates for nerve-sparing, incremental nerve sparing and non-nerve-sparing surgery.

resultsOverall, data from 3169 hemi-prostates were considered, after the exclusion of prostatic lobes with no biopsy-documented tumor. EPE was present on final pathology in 1,094 (34%) cases. Among these, MRI was able to predict EPE correctly in 568 (52%) cases. A model including PSA, maximum diameter of the index lesion, presence of EPE on MRI, highest ISUP grade in the ipsilateral hemi-prostate, and percentage of positive cores in the ipsilateral hemi-prostate achieved an AUC of 81% after internal validation. Overall, 566, 577, and 2,026 observations fell in the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups for EPE, as identified by the regression tree. The EPE rate across the groups was: 5.1%, 14.9%, and 48% for the low-, intermediate- and high-risk group, respectively.

conclusionIn this study we present an update of the first side-specific MRI-based nomogram for the prediction of extraprostatic extension together with updated risk categories to help clinicians in deciding on the best approach to nerve-preservation.

Indexed as

Image-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNomogramsPrognosisProstateRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID38182804
OpenAlexW4390617563

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.