Prediction of extraprostatic extension by MRI tumor contact length: difference between anterior and posterior prostate cancer

被引:15
|
作者
Matsumoto, Kazuhiro [1 ]
Akita, Hirotaka [2 ]
Narita, Keiichi [2 ]
Hashiguchi, Akinori [3 ]
Takamatsu, Kimiharu [1 ]
Takeda, Toshikazu [1 ]
Kosaka, Takeo [1 ]
Mizuno, Ryuichi [1 ]
Kikuchi, Eiji [1 ]
Oya, Mototsugu [1 ]
Jinzaki, Masahiro [2 ]
机构
[1] Keio Univ, Dept Urol, Sch Med, Tokyo, Japan
[2] Keio Univ, Dept Diagnost Radiol, Sch Med, Tokyo, Japan
[3] Keio Univ, Dept Pathol, Sch Med, Tokyo, Japan
关键词
EXTRACAPSULAR EXTENSION; CAPSULAR CONTACT; TRANSITION ZONE; ORIGIN; SPECIMENS; PATTERNS; SPREAD; SPACE;
D O I
10.1038/s41391-019-0136-3
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background Tumor contact length (TCL) is defined as the extent of contact between prostate cancer and the prostatic capsule, and its predictive value for microscopic extraprostatic extension (EPE) has been reported. However, the impact of the zonal origin (anterior or posterior tumor) of the tumor on the diagnosis of EPE is controversial. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the records of 233 consecutive patients who underwent preoperative MRI and radical prostatectomy. We designated their tumors as anterior or posterior, and evaluated the correlation between the TCL measured by MRI and microscopic EPE in the radical prostatectomy specimen. Then, we created the predicted probability curves for EPE versus TCL for anterior and posterior prostate cancer. Results There were 109 patients (47%) with an anterior tumor and 124 patients (53%) with a posterior tumor. Postoperative pathological analysis confirmed pT3 in 18 patients (17%) with an anterior tumor and in 53 patients (43%) with a posterior tumor. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the zonal origin of the tumor was an independent predictive factor for EPE. We developed separate probability curves of EPE versus TCL for anterior and posterior prostate cancer, which revealed that anterior tumors were less likely to invade the extraprostatic tissues. Among patients whose TCL was 10-20 mm, 9/32 patients (28%) with an anterior tumor had EPE compared with 24/45 patients (53%) with a posterior tumor (p = 0.036). The decision curve of this EPE predictive model had high clinical efficacy. Conclusions Our results indicate that anterior tumors have more favorable pathological characteristics than posterior tumors with the same TCL measured by MRI. We constructed two separate predicted probability curves for EPE after discriminating anterior and posterior tumors, which will be useful for decision making in clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页码:539 / 545
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prediction of extraprostatic extension by MRI tumor contact length: difference between anterior and posterior prostate cancer
    Kazuhiro Matsumoto
    Hirotaka Akita
    Keiichi Narita
    Akinori Hashiguchi
    Kimiharu Takamatsu
    Toshikazu Takeda
    Takeo Kosaka
    Ryuichi Mizuno
    Eiji Kikuchi
    Mototsugu Oya
    Masahiro Jinzaki
    Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, 2019, 22 : 539 - 545
  • [2] MRI TUMOR CONTACT LENGTH AS A PREDICTOR OF EXTRACAPSULAR EXTENSION: OPTIMAL THRESHOLD FOR ANTERIOR AND POSTERIOR PROSTATE CANCER
    Matsumoto, Kazuhiro
    Takamatsu, Kimiharu
    Hattori, Seiya
    Takeda, Toshikazu
    Kosaka, Takeo
    Mizuno, Ryuichi
    Kikuchi, Eiji
    Asanuma, Hiroshi
    Oya, Mototsugu
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E901 - E901
  • [3] The absolute tumor-capsule contact length in the diagnosis of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer
    Eurboonyanun, Kulyada
    Pisuchpen, Nisanard
    O'Shea, Aileen
    Lahoud, Rita Maria
    Atre, Isha D.
    Harisinghani, Mukesh
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2021, 46 (08) : 4014 - 4024
  • [4] The absolute tumor-capsule contact length in the diagnosis of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer
    Kulyada Eurboonyanun
    Nisanard Pisuchpen
    Aileen O’Shea
    Rita Maria Lahoud
    Isha D. Atre
    Mukesh Harisinghani
    Abdominal Radiology, 2021, 46 : 4014 - 4024
  • [5] Prostate cancer staging: Correlation between ultrasound determined tumor contact length and pathologically confirmed extraprostatic extension
    Ukimura, O
    Troncoso, P
    Ramirez, EI
    Babaian, RJ
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1998, 159 (04): : 1251 - 1259
  • [6] Length of capsular contact for diagnosing extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI: Assessment at an optimal threshold
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Shanbhogue, Alampady K.
    Wang, Annie
    Kong, Max Xiangtian
    Babb, James S.
    Taneja, Samir S.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2016, 43 (04) : 990 - 997
  • [7] The Diagnostic Performance of the Length of Tumor Capsular Contact on MRI for Detecting Prostate Cancer Extraprostatic Extension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Kim, Tae-Hyung
    Woo, Sungmin
    Han, Sangwon
    Suh, Chong Hyun
    Ghafoor, Soleen
    Hricak, Hedvig
    Vargas, Hebert Alberto
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2020, 21 (06) : 684 - 694
  • [8] Evaluation of MRI for diagnosis of extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer
    Krishna, Satheesh
    Lim, Christopher S.
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    Flood, Trevor A.
    Shabana, Wael M.
    Lim, Robert S.
    Schieda, Nicola
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2018, 47 (01) : 176 - 185
  • [9] Prediction of Extraprostatic Extension in Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: The Evolving Role of Endorectal MRI
    Pugh, T. J.
    Frank, S. J.
    Achim, M.
    Kuban, D. A.
    Lee, A. K.
    Choi, S.
    Nguyen, Q.
    Hoffman, K.
    McGuire, S. E.
    Swanson, D. A.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2011, 81 (02): : S398 - S398
  • [10] Diagnostic Utility of a Likert Scale Versus Qualitative Descriptors and Length of Capsular Contact for Determining Extraprostatic Tumor Extension at Multiparametric Prostate MRI
    Costa, Daniel N.
    Passoni, Niccolo M.
    Leyendecker, John R.
    De Leon, Alberto Diaz
    Lotan, Yair
    Roehrborn, Claus G.
    Otero-Muinelo, Susana
    Grewal, Harpreet
    Xi, Yin
    Francis, Franto
    Rofsky, Neil M.
    Pedrosa, Ivan
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2018, 210 (05) : 1066 - 1072