Home > Riviste > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 December;72(6) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 December;72(6):746-54



Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo



Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 December;72(6):746-54

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.20.03688-7


lingua: Inglese

Performance of prostate multiparametric MRI for prediction of prostate cancer extra-prostatic extension according to NCCN risk categories: implication for surgical planning

Ugo G. FALAGARIO 1, 2 , Ivan JAMBOR 3, 4, Parita RATNANI 1, Alberto MARTINI 1, Patrick-Julien TREACY 1, Ethan WAJSWOL 1, Anna LANTZ 1, 5, 6, George PAPASTEFANOU 1, Rachel WEIL 1, Deron PHILLIP 1, Sara LEWIS 3, Kenneth HAINES 7, Luigi CORMIO 2, Giuseppe CARRIERI 2, Natasha KYPRIANOU 1, Peter WIKLUND 1, 6, Ashutosh K. TEWARI 1

1 Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; 2 Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy; 3 Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; 4 Department of Radiology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland; 5 Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; 6 Department of Urology, Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Sweden; 7 Department of Pathology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

BACKGROUND: Prediction of extra-prostatic extension (EPE) in men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) is of utmost importance. Great variability in the performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been reported for prediction of EPE. The present study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of mpMRI for predicting EPE in different National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk categories.
METHODS: Overall 664 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy with a staging mpMRI were enrolled in this single-center, retrospective study. Patients with mpMRI report non-compliant with PI-RADSv2.0, were excluded. Patients were stratified according to NCCN criteria: very low/low (VLR-LR) to High Risk (HR) in order to assess final pathology EPE rates (focal and established). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of staging mpMRI were computed in each group. Univariable and multivariable analysis were used to evaluate predictors of positive surgical margins.
RESULTS: Pathological evaluation demonstrated established and focal EPE in 60 (9%) and 106 (16%) patients, respectively, while mpMRI suspicion for EPE was present in 180 (27%) patients. Age, preoperative PSA, PSA density, number of positive cores, NCCN groups, prostate volume, mpMRI suspicion for EPE, PIRADSv2.0 and lesion size differed significantly between the patients with any EPE and without EPE (all P≤0.05). The sensitivity of mpMRI in detecting any EPE varied from 12% (95% CI: 0.6-53%) in VLR-LR to 83% (66-93%) in HR while the corresponding values for the specificity were 92% (85-96%) and 63% (45-78%), respectively. Patients with false-negative mpMRI EPE prediction were more likely to have positive surgical margins in univariable (OR: 2.14; CI: 1.18, 3.87) as well as multivariable analysis adjusting for NCCN risk categories (OR: 1.97; CI: 1.08, 3.60).
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of mpMRI for prediction of EPE varies greatly between different NCCN risk categories with a low positive predicting value in patients at low to favorable intermediate risk and a low negative predictive value in patients at Unfavorable intermediate to high risk PCa. Given that mpMRI EPE misdiagnosis could have a negative impact on oncological and functional outcomes, NCCN risk categories should be considered when interpreting mpMRI findings in PCa patients.

KEY WORDS: Prostatic neoplasms; Neoplasm staging; Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostatectomy

inizio pagina