|Table of Contents|

Establishment and application of prostate biopsy on ISUP upgradation prediction profile model after radical prostatectomy

Journal Of Modern Oncology[ISSN:1672-4992/CN:61-1415/R]

Issue:
2023 03
Page:
517-522
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Establishment and application of prostate biopsy on ISUP upgradation prediction profile model after radical prostatectomy
Author(s):
LI Peng; ZHANG Zhilei; LUO Lei; JIA Yuefeng; ZHANG Mingxin; ZHANG Guiming; SUN Lijiang
Department of Urology,the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University,Shandong Qingdao 266003,China.
Keywords:
prostate cancer; aspiration biopsy; ISUP upgrade; radical prostatectomy; nomogram
PACS:
R737.25
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1672-4992.2023.03.025
Abstract:
Objective:To develop and internally validate a nomogram for risk of upgrade of ISUP grade group from biopsy tissue to RP final histology.Methods:166 patients by biopsy and RP in our hospital from May 2019 to May 2020 were analyzed retrospectively.Logistic regression analysis was used to predict the significant independent factors for ISUP upgrade.A nomogram was then developed based on these independent factors.The C-index,calibration plot,and decision curve analysis were used to assess the discrimination,calibration,and clinical usefulness of the predicting model.Internal validation was evaluated by using the bootstrapping validation.Results:There were 47 patients(29.3%) in the ISUP upgrade group and 119 patients(71.7%) in the no ISUP upgrade group respectively.Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that Gleason scores(P=0.001),prostate biopsy approach(P=0.03) and number of positive cores(P=0.04) were the independent risk factors for ISUP upgrade.A prediction nomogram model of ISUP upgrade was built based on these significant factors above,the AUC of which was 0.802.The C-index for the prediction nomogram was 0.798 and the nomogram showed good calibration.High C-index value of 0.772 could still be reached in the interval validation.Decision curve analysis also demonstrated that the threshold value of RP-ISUP upgrade risk was 3% to 67%.Conclusion:A novel nomogram was built with a relatively good accuracy to assist clinicians to evaluate the risk of ISUP upgrade in the RP specimen,especially for the low-risk prostate cancer diagnosed by transrectal prostate biopsy.

References:

[1]BHAT A,MAHAJAN V,WOLFE N.Implicit bias in stroke care:A recurring old problem in the rising incidence of young stroke［J］.J Clin Neurosci,2021,85:27-35.
[2] LIU X,YU C,BI Y,et al.Trends and age-period-cohort effect on incidence and mortality of prostate cancer from 1990 to 2017 in China［J］.Public Health,2019,172:70-80.
[3] NOGUCHI M,STAMEY TA,MCNEAL JE,et al.Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens:lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer［J］.J Urol,2001,166(1):104-110.
[4] EPSTEIN JI,EGEVAD L,AMIN MB,et al.The 2014 international society of urological pathology(ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma:Definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system［J］.The American Journal of Surgical Pathology,2016,40(2):244-252.
[5] WISSING M,BRIMO F,CHEVALIER S,et al.Optimization of the 2014 Gleason grade grouping in a Canadian cohort of patients with localized prostate cancer［J］.BJU International,2019,123(4):624-631.
[6] ATHANAZIO D,GOTTO G,SHEA-BUDGELL M,et al.Global Gleason grade groups in prostate cancer:concordance of biopsy and radical prostatectomy grades and predictors of upgrade and downgrade［J］.Histopathology,2017,70(7):1098-1106.
[7] DE NUNZIO C,PASTORE AL,LOMBARDO R,et al.The new Epstein gleason score classification significantly reduces upgrading in prostate cancer patients［J］.European Journal of Surgical Oncology,2018,44(6):835-839.
[8] GUO LH,WU R,XU HX,et al.Comparison between ultrasound guided transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy:A prospective,randomized,and controlled trial［J］.Sci Rep,2015,5:16089.
[9] DAHLMAN D,LI X,CRUMP C,et al.Drug use disorder and risk of incident and fatal prostate cancer among Swedish men:a nationwide epidemiological study［J］.Cancer Causes Control,2022,33(2):213-222.
[10] EPSTEIN JI,FENG Z,TROCK BJ,et al.Upgrading and downgrading of prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy:incidence and predictive factors using the modified Gleason grading system and factoring in tertiary grades［J］.Eur Urol,2012,61(5):1019-1024.
[11] BEAUVAL JB,PLOUSSARD G,SOULIEM,et al.Pathologic findings in radical prostatectomy specimens from patients eligible for active surveillance with highly selective criteria:a multicenter study［J］.Urology,2012,80(3):656-660.
[12] EPSTEIN JI,AMIN MB,REUTER VE,et al.Contemporary gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma:An update with discussion on practical issues to implement the 2014 international society of urological pathology(ISUP) consensus conference on gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma［J］.The American Journal of Surgical Pathology,2017,41(4):e1-e7.
[13] POMPE RS,DAVIS-BONDARENKO H,ZAFFUTO E,et al.Population-based validation of the 2014 ISUP gleason grade groups in patients treated with radical prostatectomy,brachytherapy,external beam radiation,or no local treatment［J］.The Prostate,2017,77(6):686-693.
[14] CHUN KH,STEUBER T,ERBERSDOBLER A,et al.Development and internal validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of prostate cancer gleason sum upgrading between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathology［J］.Eur Urol,2006,49(5):820-826.
[15] HUMPHREY,PETER A.Complete histologic serial sectioning of a prostate gland with adenocarcinoma［J］.Am J Surg Pathol,1993,17(5):468-472.
[16] BUDAUS L,GRAEFEN M,SALOMON G,et al.The novel nomogram of Gleason sum upgrade:Possible application for the eligible criteria of low dose rate brachytherapy［J］.International Journal of Urology Official Journal of the Japanese Urological Association,2010,17(10):862-868.
[17] WANG JY,ZHU Y,WANG CF,et al.A nomogram to predict Gleason sum upgrading of clinically diagnosed localized prostate cancer among Chinese patients［J］.Chin J Cancer,2014,33(005):241-248.
[18] HE B,CHEN R,GAO X,et al.Nomograms for predicting Gleason upgrading in a contemporary Chinese cohort receiving radical prostatectomy after extended prostate biopsy:development and internal validation［J］.Oncotarget,2016,7(13):17275-17285.
[19] TURAN T,GUCLUER B,EFILOGLU O,et al.The factors predicting upgrading of prostate cancer by using International Society for Urological Pathology(ISUP) 2014 Gleason grading system［J］.Turkish Journal of Urology,2019,45(Supp 1):S36-S41.
[20] CAMDZICN,KUSKUNOVIC-VLAHOVLJAK S,DORIOM,et al.Serum total prostate-specific antigen(tPSA):correlation with diagnosis and grading of prostate cancer in core needle biopsy［J］.Med Glas(Zenica),2021,18(1):122-127.
[21] 秦建瑞,程文超,王文军.直肠指检与磁共振波谱成像联合血清PSA检测在前列腺癌诊断中的应用效果［J］.河南外科学杂志,2017,23(06):38-39. QIN JR,CHENG WC,WANG WJ.Application of digital rectal examination and magnetic resonance spectroscopy combined with serum PSA in the diagnosis of prostate cancer［J］.Henan J Surg,2017,23(06):38-39.
[22]MOE A,HAYNE D.Transrectal ultrasound biopsy of the prostate:does it still have a role in prostate cancer diagnosis［J］.Transl Androl Urol,2020,9(6):3018-3024.
[23]SIDDIQUI MM,RAIS-BAHRAMI S,TRUONG H,et al.Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy［J］.Eur Urol,2013,64(5):713-719.

Memo

Memo:
山东省自然科学基金（编号：ZR2021MH354）；吴阶平医学基金会临床科研专项资助基金（编号：320.6750.2020-14-13）
Last Update: 2022-12-30