Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 1/2020

01-01-2020 | Prostate Cancer | Urogenital

Prediction of extraprostatic extension on multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in patients with anterior prostate cancer

Authors: Hyungwoo Ahn, Sung Il Hwang, Hak Jong Lee, Hyoung Sim Suh, Gheeyoung Choe, Seok-Soo Byun, Sung Kyu Hong, Sangchul Lee, Joongyub Lee

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To validate how established markers of extraprostatic extension (EPE) are applied to anterior prostate cancers (APCs), and to investigate other novel markers if available.

Methods

Among 614 histopathologically confirmed APCs from 2011 to 2016, 221 lesions with PiRADS (verion 2) scores ≥ 4 on 3-T multi-parametric MRI were analyzed retrospectively. Two radiologists independently assessed capsular morphology qualitatively with 5-point scale (normal, thinning, bulging, loss, extracapsular disease), and capsule contact length (arc), tumor dimension, and their ratio (arc-dimension ratio) quantitatively. Reproducibility in measurement was assessed with κ and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Logistic regression analysis was done to find meaningful indicators of EPE. Diagnostic performance of markers was compared to one another with generalized linear model and multi-reader multi-case ROC analysis.

Results

Reproducibility was moderate to substantial (κ 0.45–0.73) for qualitative, and moderate to almost perfect (ICC 0.50–0.87) for quantitative features of EPE. Capsular morphology (odds ratio [OR] 1.818), capsule contact length (OR 1.115), tumor dimension (OR 1.035), and arc-dimension ratio (OR 1.846) were independently associated with EPE (p ≤ 0.019). Capsular bulging and capsule contact length of 10 mm as thresholds of EPE demonstrated sensitivity/specificity of 0.58/0.85 and 0.77/0.68, respectively. Capsule contact length yielded greatest AUC (0.784), followed by capsular morphology (0.778), arc-dimension ratio (0.749), and tumor dimension (0.741). Diagnostic performance of capsular morphology, capsule contact length, and arc-dimension ratio was comparable in predicting EPE.

Conclusions

Existing markers of EPE applicable regardless of locations of tumors apply similarly to APCs. Arc-dimension ratio may be a novel marker of EPE of APCs.

Key Points

• Existing imaging markers of extraprostatic extension (EPE) which have been applied regardless of locations of tumors are reflected similarly to anterior prostate cancers (APCs).
• Measuring tumor dimension without capsular assessment may result in insufficient pre-operative prediction of EPE of APCs.
• Arc-dimension ratio (capsule contact length divided by tumor dimension) exhibited highest OR and comparable performance to existing features in predicting EPE of APCs.
Literature
1.
Fine SW, Al-Ahmadie HA, Gopalan A, Tickoo SK, Scardino PT, Reuter VE (2007) Anatomy of the anterior prostate and extraprostatic space: a contemporary surgical pathology analysis. Adv Anat Pathol 14:401–407CrossRefPubMed
2.
Kang YJ, Abalajon MJ, Jang WS et al (2016) Association of anterior and lateral extraprostatic extensions with base-positive resection margins in prostate cancer. PLoS One 11:e0158922CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Montironi R, van der Kwast T, Boccon-Gibod L, Bono AV, Boccon-Gibod L (2003) Handling and pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. Eur Urol 44:626–636CrossRefPubMed
4.
Epstein JI, Amin M, Boccon-Gibod L et al (2005) Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 39:34–63CrossRef
5.
Magi-Galluzzi C, Evans AJ, Delahunt B et al (2011) International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease. Mod Pathol 24:26–38CrossRefPubMed
6.
Mills SE (2012) Histology for pathologists, 4th edn. Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia
7.
Kiyoshima K, Yokomizo A, Yoshida T et al (2004) Anatomical features of periprostatic tissue and its surroundings: a histological analysis of 79 radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens. Jpn J Clin Oncol 34:463–468CrossRefPubMed
8.
Gaunay GS, Patel V, Shah P et al (2017) Multi-parametric MRI of the prostate: factors predicting extracapsular extension at the time of radical prostatectomy. Asian J Urol 4:31–36CrossRefPubMed
9.
Krishna S, Lim CS, McInnes MDF et al (2018) Evaluation of MRI for diagnosis of extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 47:176–185CrossRefPubMed
10.
Feng TS, Sharif-Afshar AR, Smith SC et al (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging localizes established extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 33:109 e15–109 e22CrossRef
11.
Verma S, Rajesh A (2011) A clinically relevant approach to imaging prostate cancer: review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:S1–10 Quiz S11–4CrossRefPubMed
12.
Rosenkrantz AB, Shanbhogue AK, Wang A, Kong MX, Babb JS, Taneja SS (2016) Length of capsular contact for diagnosing extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI: assessment at an optimal threshold. J Magn Reson Imaging 43:990–997CrossRefPubMed
13.
Kongnyuy M, Sidana A, George AK et al (2017) Tumor contact with prostate capsule on magnetic resonance imaging: a potential biomarker for staging and prognosis. Urol Oncol 35:30 e1–30 e8CrossRef
14.
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL et al (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging – reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed
15.
16.
Akin O, Sala E, Moskowitz CS et al (2006) Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology 239:784–792CrossRefPubMed
17.
Hoffmann R, Logan C, O'Callaghan M, Gormly K, Chan K, Foreman D (2018) Does the prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PI-RADS) version 2 improve accuracy in reporting anterior lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)? Int Urol Nephrol 50:13–19
18.
Schieda N, Lim CS, Idris M et al (2017) MRI assessment of pathological stage and surgical margins in anterior prostate cancer (APC) using subjective and quantitative analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:1296–1303CrossRefPubMed
19.
20.
Mai KT, Moazin M, Morash C, Collins JP (2001) Transitional zone and anterior peripheral zone of the prostate. A correlation of smallvolume cancer in the biopsy cores and high psa with positive anterior margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Int 66:191–196CrossRefPubMed
21.
Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159CrossRefPubMed
22.
Vatcheva KP, Lee M, McCormick JB, Rahbar MH (2016) Multicollinearity in regression analyses conducted in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiol (Sunnyvale) 6:227CrossRef
23.
Dormann CF, Elith J, Sven B et al (2013) Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography 36(1):27–46CrossRef
24.
Ruopp MD, Perkins NJ, Whitcomb BW, Schisterman EF (2008) Youden index and optimal cut-point estimated from observations affected by a lower limit of detection. Biom J 50:419–430CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
26.
Faraggi D (2000) The effect of random measurement error on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Stat Med 19:61–70CrossRefPubMed
27.
Reiser B (2000) Measuring the effectiveness of diagnostic markers in the presence of measurement error through the use of ROC curves. Stat Med 19:2115–2129CrossRefPubMed
28.
Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Schartz KM, Berbaum KS (2005) A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data. Stat Med 24:1579–1607CrossRefPubMed
29.
Hillis SL (2007) A comparison of denominator degrees of freedom methods formultiple observer ROC analysis. StatMed 26:596–619
30.
Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE (2008) Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol 15:647–661CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Pan X, Metz CE (1997) The “proper” binormal model: parametric receiver operating characteristic curve estimation with degenerate data. Acad Radiol 4:380–389CrossRefPubMed
32.
Ma H, Bandos AI, Rockette HE, Gur D (2013) On use of partial area under the ROC curve for evaluation of diagnostic performance. Stat Med 32:3449–3458CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
34.
35.
36.
Mehralivand S, Shih JH, Harmon S et al (2019) A grading system for the assessment of risk of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer at multiparametric MRI. Radiology 290:709–719CrossRefPubMed
37.
Rosenkrantz AB, Ginocchio LA, Cornfeld D et al (2016) Interobserver reproducibility of the PI-RADS version 2 lexicon: a multicenter study of six experienced prostate radiologists. Radiology 280:793–804CrossRefPubMed
38.
39.
Woo S, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH (2017) Length of capsular contact on prostate MRI as a predictor of extracapsular extension: which is the most optimal sequence? Acta Radiol 58:489–497CrossRefPubMed
40.
Kamoi K, Okihara K, Hongo F et al (2017) MP93-20 tumor contact length with prostate capsule on magnetic resonance imaging as a potential predictor for biochemical recurrence after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 197:e1244
41.
Woo S, Cho JY, Kim SY, Kim SH (2015) Extracapsular extension in prostate cancer: added value of diffusion-weighted MRI in patients with equivocal findings on T2-weighted imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:W168–W175CrossRefPubMed
42.
Leeflang MM, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Hooft L, Bossuyt PMa (2013) Variation of a test’s sensitivity and specificity with disease prevalence. CMAJ 185:E537–E544
43.
Brenner H, Gefeller O (1997) Variation of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values with disease prevalence. Stat Med 16:981–991CrossRefPubMed
44.
Evans AJ, Henry PC, Van der Kwast TH et al (2008) Interobserver variability between expert urologic pathologists for extraprostatic extension and surgical margin status in radical prostatectomy specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 32:1503–1512CrossRefPubMed
45.
Ekici S, Ayhan A, Erkan I, Bakkaloğlu M, Ozen H (2003) The role of the pathologist in the evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 37:387–391
46.
van der Kwast TH, Collette L, Van Poppel H et al (2006) Impact of pathology review of stage and margin status of radical prostatectomy specimens (EORTC trial 22911). Virchows Arch 449:428–434CrossRefPubMed
47.
Danneman D, Wiklund F, Wiklund NP, Egevad L (2013) Prognostic significance of histopathological features of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer. Histopathology 63:580–589PubMed
48.
Maubon T, Branger N, Bastide C et al (2016) Impact of the extent of extraprostatic extension defined by Epstein’s method in patients with negative surgical margins and negative lymph node invasion. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19:317–321CrossRefPubMed
49.
Wheeler TM, Dillioglugil O, Kattan MW et al (1998) Clinical and pathological significance of the level and extent of capsular invasion in clinical stage T1-2 prostate cancer. Hum Pathol 29:856–862CrossRefPubMed
50.
McKenna DA, Coakley FV, Westphalen AC et al (2008) Prostate cancer: role of pretreatment MR in predicting outcome after external-beam radiation therapy–initial experience. Radiology 247:141–146CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Prediction of extraprostatic extension on multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in patients with anterior prostate cancer
Authors
Hyungwoo Ahn
Sung Il Hwang
Hak Jong Lee
Hyoung Sim Suh
Gheeyoung Choe
Seok-Soo Byun
Sung Kyu Hong
Sangchul Lee
Joongyub Lee
Publication date
01-01-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06340-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

European Radiology 1/2020 Go to the issue

Cardiac

Application of the newest European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging Recommendation regarding the long-term prognostic relevance of left ventricular diastolic function in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Cardiac

Early detection of heart function abnormality by native T1: a comparison of two T1 quantification methods

Ultrasound

Strain elastography as an early predictor of long-term prognosis in patients with locally advanced cervical cancers treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy

Musculoskeletal

Patellofemoral morphology measurements and their associations with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis-related structural damage: exploratory analysis on the osteoarthritis initiative

Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence

Quality of science and reporting of radiomics in oncologic studies: room for improvement according to radiomics quality score and TRIPOD statement

Magnetic Resonance

Practical guide to quantification of hepatic iron with MRI