Diagnostic performance of ESUR scoring system for extraprostatic prostate cancer extension: A meta-analysis

Imaging Assessment of Prostate Cancer Extra-prostatic Extension: From Histology to Controversies

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-skin malignancy among men and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Accurate staging of PCa, particularly the assessment of extra-prostatic extension (EPE), is critical for prognosis and treatment planning. EPE, typically evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is associated with higher risks of positive surgical margins, biochemical recurrence, metastasis, and reduced overall survival. Despite the widespread use of MRI, there is no consensus on diagnosing EPE via imaging. There are 2 main scores assessing EPE by MRI: the European Society of Urogenital Radiology score and an MRI-based EPE grading system from an American group. While both are widely recognized, their differences can lead to varying interpretations in specific cases. This paper clarifies the anatomical considerations in diagnosing locally advanced PCa, explores EPE's impact on treatment and prognosis, and evaluates the relevance of MRI findings according to different criteria. Accurate EPE diagnosis remains challenging due to MRI limitations and inconsistencies in interpretation. Understanding these variations is crucial for optimal patient management.

External validation of nomograms including MRI features for the prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension

BACKGROUND

Prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension (EPE) is crucial in selecting patients for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP). Multiple nomograms, which include magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) information, are available predict side-specific EPE. It is crucial that the accuracy of these nomograms is assessed with external validation to ensure they can be used in clinical practice to support medical decision-making.

METHODS

Data of prostate cancer (PCa) patients that underwent robot-assisted RP (RARP) from 2017 to 2021 at four European tertiary referral centers were collected retrospectively. Four previously developed nomograms for the prediction of side-specific EPE were identified and externally validated. Discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]), calibration and net benefit of four nomograms were assessed. To assess the strongest predictor among the MRI features included in all nomograms, we evaluated their association with side-specific EPE using multivariate regression analysis and Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

RESULTS

This study involved 773 patients with a total of 1546 prostate lobes. EPE was found in 338 (22%) lobes. The AUCs of the models predicting EPE ranged from 72.2% (95% CI 69.1-72.3%) (Wibmer) to 75.5% (95% CI 72.5-78.5%) (Nyarangi-Dix). The nomogram with the highest AUC varied across the cohorts. The Soeterik, Nyarangi-Dix, and Martini nomograms demonstrated fair to good calibration for clinically most relevant thresholds between 5 and 30%. In contrast, the Wibmer nomogram showed substantial overestimation of EPE risk for thresholds above 25%. The Nyarangi-Dix nomogram demonstrated a higher net benefit for risk thresholds between 20 and 30% when compared to the other three nomograms. Of all MRI features, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology score and tumor capsule contact length showed the highest AUCs and lowest AIC.

CONCLUSION

The Nyarangi-Dix, Martini and Soeterik nomograms resulted in accurate EPE prediction and are therefore suitable to support medical decision-making.

A preoperative scoring system for predicting the extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy using magnetic resonance imaging and clinical factors

PURPOSE

We aimed to develop a preoperative prediction model for extraprostatic extension (EPE) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients following radical prostatectomy (RP) using MRI and clinical factors.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 266 consecutive patients who underwent RP for PCa in 2022. These patients were divided into a training set (n = 187) and a test set (n = 79) through random assignment. The evaluated variables included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, prostate volume, PSA density (PSAD), index tumor length on MRI, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category, and EPE-related MRI features as defined by PI-RADS v2.1. A predictive model was constructed through multivariable logistic regression and subsequently translated into a scoring system. The performance of this scoring system in terms of prediction and calibration was assessed using C statistics and the Hosmer‒Lemeshow test.

RESULTS

Among patients in the training and test cohorts, 74 (39.6%) and 25 (31.6%), respectively, exhibited EPE after RP. The formulated scoring system incorporated the following factors: PSAD, index tumor length, bulging prostatic contour, and tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm as identified on MRI. This scoring system demonstrated strong prediction performance for EPE in both the training (C statistic, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.87]) and test cohorts (C statistic, 0.85 [0.83-0.89]). Furthermore, the scoring system exhibited good calibration in both cohorts (P = 0.988 and 0.402, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our scoring system, built upon MRI features defined by the PI-RADS, offers valuable assistance in assessing the likelihood of EPE after RP.

Radiomics for the identification of extraprostatic extension with prostate MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Extraprostatic extension (EPE) of prostate cancer (PCa) is predicted using clinical nomograms. Incorporating MRI could represent a leap forward, although poor sensitivity and standardization represent unsolved issues. MRI radiomics has been proposed for EPE prediction. The aim of the study was to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis of MRI-based radiomics approaches for EPE prediction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multiple databases were systematically searched for radiomics studies on EPE detection up to June 2022. Methodological quality was appraised according to Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool and radiomics quality score (RQS). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was pooled to estimate predictive accuracy. A random-effects model estimated overall effect size. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with I2 value. Publication bias was evaluated with a funnel plot. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included, showing limitations in study design and methodological quality (median RQS 10/36), with high statistical heterogeneity. Pooled AUC for EPE identification was 0.80. In subgroup analysis, test-set and cross-validation-based studies had pooled AUC of 0.85 and 0.89 respectively. Pooled AUC was 0.72 for deep learning (DL)-based and 0.82 for handcrafted radiomics studies and 0.79 and 0.83 for studies with multiple and single scanner data, respectively. Finally, models with the best predictive performance obtained using radiomics features showed pooled AUC of 0.82, while those including clinical data of 0.76.

CONCLUSION

MRI radiomics-powered models to identify EPE in PCa showed a promising predictive performance overall. However, methodologically robust, clinically driven research evaluating their diagnostic and therapeutic impact is still needed.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Radiomics might improve the management of prostate cancer patients increasing the value of MRI in the assessment of extraprostatic extension. However, it is imperative that forthcoming research prioritizes confirmation studies and a stronger clinical orientation to solidify these advancements.

KEY POINTS

• MRI radiomics deserves attention as a tool to overcome the limitations of MRI in prostate cancer local staging. • Pooled AUC was 0.80 for the 13 included studies, with high heterogeneity (84.7%, p < .001), methodological issues, and poor clinical orientation. • Methodologically robust radiomics research needs to focus on increasing MRI sensitivity and bringing added value to clinical nomograms at patient level.

MRI-based radiomics for prediction of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We to systematically evaluate the diagnostic performance of MRI radiomics in detecting extracapsular extension (EPE) of prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A literature search of online databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar online scientific publication databases was performed to identify studies published up to July 2023. The summary estimates were pooled with the hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic (HSROC) model. This study was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, the quality of included studies was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool (QUADAS-2) and the radiomics quality score (RQS). Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore the impact of varying clinical settings.

RESULTS

A total of ten studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 (95% CI 0.68-0.84, I2 = 83.5%) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.67-0.82, I2 = 83.5%), respectively, with an area under the HSROC curve of 0.88 (95% CI 0.85-0.91). Study quality was not high while assessing with the RQS. Substantial heterogeneity was observed between studies; however, meta-regression analysis did not reveal any significant contributing factors.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI radiomics demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity, offering similar diagnostic performance with previous risk stratifications and models that primarily based on radiologists' subjective experience. However, all studies included were retrospective, thus the performance of radiomics needs to validate in prospective, multicenter studies.

The Diagnostic Performance of Tumor Stage on MRI for Predicting Prostate Cancer-Positive Surgical Margins: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Surgical margin status in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens is an established predictive indicator for determining biochemical prostate cancer recurrence and disease progression. Predicting positive surgical margins (PSMs) is of utmost importance. We sought to perform a meta-analysis evaluating the diagnostic utility of a high clinical tumor stage (≥3) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for predicting PSMs.

METHOD

A systematic search of the PubMed, Embase databases, and Cochrane Library was performed, covering the interval from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2022, to identify relevant studies. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 method was used to evaluate the studies' quality. A hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic plot was created depicting sensitivity and specificity data. Analyses of subgroups and meta-regression were used to investigate heterogeneity.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis comprised 13 studies with 3924 individuals in total. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values were 0.40 (95% CI, 0.32-0.49) and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.69-0.80), respectively, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.59-0.67). The Higgins I2 statistics indicated moderate heterogeneity in sensitivity (I2 = 75.59%) and substantial heterogeneity in specificity (I2 = 86.77%). Area, prevalence of high Gleason scores (≥7), laparoscopic or robot-assisted techniques, field strength, functional technology, endorectal coil usage, and number of radiologists were significant factors responsible for heterogeneity (p ≤ 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

T stage on MRI has moderate diagnostic accuracy for predicting PSMs. When determining the treatment modality, clinicians should consider the factors contributing to heterogeneity for this purpose.

Imaging features of the PI-RADS for predicting extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To systematically determine the diagnostic performance of each MRI feature of the PI-RADS for predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in prostate cancer.

METHODS

A literature search in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was conducted to identify original studies reporting the accuracy of each feature on MRI for the dichotomous diagnosis of EPE. The meta-analytic pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), sensitivity, specificity, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using a bivariate random-effects model.

RESULTS

After screening 1955 studies, 17 studies with a total of 3062 men were included. All six imaging features, i.e., bulging prostatic contour, irregular or spiculated margin, asymmetry or invasion of neurovascular bundle, obliteration of rectoprostatic angle, tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm, and breach of the capsule with evidence of direct tumor extension, were significantly associated with EPE. Breach of the capsule with direct tumor extension demonstrated the highest pooled DOR (15.6, 95% CI [7.7-31.5]) followed by tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm (10.5 [5.4-20.2]), asymmetry or invasion of neurovascular bundle (7.6 [3.8-15.2]), and obliteration of rectoprostatic angle (6.1 [3.8-9.8]). Irregular or spiculated margin showed the lowest pooled DOR (2.3 [1.3-4.2]). Breach of the capsule with direct tumor extension and tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm showed the highest pooled specificity (98.0% [96.2-99.0]) and sensitivity (86.3% [70.0-94.4]), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the six MRI features of prostate cancer, breach of the capsule with direct tumor extension and tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm were the most predictive of EPE with the highest specificity and sensitivity, respectively.

Diagnostic Performance of Extraprostatic Extension Grading System for Detection of Extraprostatic Extension in Prostate Cancer: A Diagnostic Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the extraprostatic extension (EPE) grading system for detection of EPE in patients with prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a literature search of Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar to identify eligible articles published before August 31, 2021, with no language restrictions applied. We included studies using the EPE grading system for the prediction of EPE, with histopathological results as the reference standard. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated with the bivariate model. Quality assessment of included studies was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.

RESULTS

A total of 4 studies with 1,294 patients were included in the current systematic review. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.82 (95% CI 0.76-0.87) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.51-0.73), with the area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve of 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.85). The pooled LR+, LR-, and DOR were 2.20 (95% CI 1.70-2.86), 0.28 (95% CI 0.22-0.36), and 7.77 (95% CI 5.27-11.44), respectively. Quality assessment for included studies was high, and Deeks's funnel plot indicated that the possibility of publication bias was low (p = 0.64).

CONCLUSION

The EPE grading system demonstrated high sensitivity and moderate specificity, with a good inter-reader agreement. However, this scoring system needs more studies to be validated in clinical practice.