Skip to content
2000
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Current Medical Imaging
  4. Volume 20, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1573-4056
  • E-ISSN: 1875-6603
file format pdf download PDF
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Objective

Extraprostatic extension (EPE) serves as a crucial marker of prostate cancer aggressiveness and independently predicts the likelihood of biochemical recurrence (BCR), exhibiting a strong correlation with the histologic severity of EPE. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the probability of EPE along the zonal level of the prostate by measuring tumor contact length (TCL) using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

Patients and Methods

Records of 308 patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy (RP) were identified. Tumor levels in the prostate were categorized as apex, mid-gland, and base, after which the correlation between TCL measured using MRI and microscopic EPE on pathologic specimens was evaluated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association among tumor origin, index tumor diameter, and TCL measured using MRI and microscopic EPE in RP specimens.

Results

Among the 214 patients included, 45 apical cancers (21%), 87 mid-gland cancers (41%), and 82 base cancers (38%) were observed. Pathological reports revealed that 18 (40.0%) apex, 31 (35.6%) mid-gland, and 50 (61.0%) base tumors were pT3a. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that the zonal level of the tumor, especially the base level, was an independent predictive factor for EPE ( < 0.001), and the AUC value of the base tumor was 0.858.

Conclusion

Prostate cancers arising from the base were more likely to exhibit EPE than those arising from the mid-gland and apex of the prostate gland. Therefore, identifying the origin of the zonal level of prostate cancer may help guide treatment decisions and predict clinical prognosis.

© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Bentham Open.
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Bentham Open. This is an open access article published under CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737
2024-01-01
2024-11-23

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/cmir/20/1/CMIM-20-e080923220826.html?itemId=/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. BrayF. FerlayJ. SoerjomataramI. SiegelR.L. TorreL.A. JemalA. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.CA Cancer J. Clin.201868639442410.3322/caac.2149230207593
     [Google Scholar]
  2. CatalonaW.J. BiggS.W. Nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: Evaluation of results after 250 patients.J. Urol.1990143353854310.1016/S0022‑5347(17)40013‑92304166
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BallM.W. PartinA.W. EpsteinJ.I. Extent of extraprostatic extension independently influences biochemical recurrence-free survival: Evidence for further pT3 subclassification.Urology201585116116410.1016/j.urology.2014.08.02525440818
     [Google Scholar]
  4. RosenkrantzA.B. ShanbhogueA.K. WangA. KongM.X. BabbJ.S. TanejaS.S. Length of capsular contact for diagnosing extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI: Assessment at an optimal threshold.J. Magn. Reson. Imaging201643499099710.1002/jmri.2504026395278
     [Google Scholar]
  5. MatsumotoK. AkitaH. NaritaK. HashiguchiA. TakamatsuK. TakedaT. KosakaT. MizunoR. KikuchiE. OyaM. JinzakiM. Prediction of extraprostatic extension by MRI tumor contact length: Difference between anterior and posterior prostate cancer.Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis.201922453954510.1038/s41391‑019‑0136‑330814680
     [Google Scholar]
  6. ToumaN.J. ChinJ.L. BellaT. SenerA. IzawaJ. Location of a positive biopsy as a predictor of surgical margin status and extraprostatic disease in radical prostatectomy.BJU Int.200697225926210.1111/j.1464‑410X.2006.05968.x16430624
     [Google Scholar]
  7. BhavsarA. VermaS. Anatomic imaging of the prostate.BioMed Res. Int.201420141910.1155/2014/72853925243174
     [Google Scholar]
  8. TurkbeyB. RosenkrantzA.B. HaiderM.A. PadhaniA.R. VilleirsG. MacuraK.J. TempanyC.M. ChoykeP.L. CornudF. MargolisD.J. ThoenyH.C. VermaS. BarentszJ. WeinrebJ.C. Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.Eur. Urol.201976334035110.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.03330898406
     [Google Scholar]
  9. EpsteinJ.I. EgevadL. AminM.B. DelahuntB. SrigleyJ.R. HumphreyP.A. 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.Am. J. Surg. Pathol.201640224425210.1097/PAS.000000000000053026492179
     [Google Scholar]
  10. CohenJ. Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.Psychol. Bull.196870421322010.1037/h002625619673146
     [Google Scholar]
  11. MottetN. van den BerghR.C.N. BriersE. Van den BroeckT. CumberbatchM.G. De SantisM. FantiS. FossatiN. GandagliaG. GillessenS. GrivasN. GrummetJ. HenryA.M. van der KwastT.H. LamT.B. LardasM. LiewM. MasonM.D. MorisL. Oprea-LagerD.E. van der PoelH.G. RouvièreO. SchootsI.G. TilkiD. WiegelT. WillemseP.P.M. CornfordP. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent.Eur. Urol.202179224326210.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.04233172724
     [Google Scholar]
  12. MatsuokaY. IshiokaJ. TanakaH. KimuraT. YoshidaS. SaitoK. FujiiY. KiharaK. Impact of the prostate imaging reporting and data system, version 2, on MRI diagnosis for extracapsular extension of prostate cancer.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.20172092W76W8410.2214/AJR.16.1716328570124
     [Google Scholar]
  13. AllanC. IlicD. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer: A systematic review.Urol. Int.201696437337810.1159/00043586126201500
     [Google Scholar]
  14. BudäusL. SpethmannJ. IsbarnH. SchmitgesJ. BeeschL. HaeseA. SalomonG. SchlommT. FischM. HeinzerH. HulandH. GraefenM. SteuberT. Inverse stage migration in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: Results of 8916 European patients treated within the last decade.BJU Int.201110881256126110.1111/j.1464‑410X.2010.09982.x21244612
     [Google Scholar]
  15. WardJ.F. SlezakJ.M. BluteM.L. BergstralhE.J. ZinckeH. Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome.BJU Int.200595675175610.1111/j.1464‑410X.2005.05394.x15794776
     [Google Scholar]
  16. KrishnaS. LimC.S. McInnesM.D.F. FloodT.A. ShabanaW.M. LimR.S. SchiedaN. Evaluation of MRI for diagnosis of extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer.J. Magn. Reson. Imaging201847117618510.1002/jmri.2572928387981
     [Google Scholar]
  17. UkimuraO. TroncosoP. RamirezE. BabaianR.J. Prostate cancer staging: Correlation between ultrasound determined tumor contact length and pathologically confirmed extraprostatic extension.J. Urol.199815941251125910.1016/S0022‑5347(01)63575‑49507847
     [Google Scholar]
  18. BacoE. RudE. VlatkovicL. SvindlandA. EggesbøH.B. HungA.J. MatsugasumiT. BernhardJ.C. GillI.S. UkimuraO. Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging determined tumor contact length for extracapsular extension of prostate cancer.J. Urol.2015193246647210.1016/j.juro.2014.08.08425150643
     [Google Scholar]
  19. WibulpolprasertP. RamanS.S. HsuW. MargolisD.J.A. AsvadiN.H. KhoshnoodiP. MoshksarA. TanN. AhujaP. MaeharaC.K. SiskA. SayreJ. LuD.S.K. ReiterR.E. Influence of the location and zone of tumor in prostate cancer detection and localization on 3-T multiparametric MRI based on PI-RADS version 2.AJR Am. J. Roentgenol.202021451101111110.2214/AJR.19.2160832130048
     [Google Scholar]
  20. LeeY.I. LeeH.M. JoJ.K. LeeS. HongS.K. ByunS.S. LeeS.E. OhJ.J. Association between seminal vesicle invasion and prostate cancer detection location after transrectal systemic biopsy among men who underwent radical prostatectomy.PLoS One2016112e014869010.1371/journal.pone.014869026848747
     [Google Scholar]
  21. BluteM.L. BostwickD.G. BergstralhE.J. SlezakJ.M. MartinS.K. AmlingC.L. ZinckeH. Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organconfined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy.Urology199750573373910.1016/S0090‑4295(97)00450‑09372884
     [Google Scholar]
  22. NayaY. BabaianR.J. The predictors of pelvic lymph node metastasis at radical retropubic prostatectomy.J. Urol.200317062306231010.1097/01.ju.0000097180.98966.0614634402
     [Google Scholar]
  23. KohH. KattanM.W. ScardinoP.T. SuyamaK. MaruN. SlawinK. WheelerT.M. OhoriM. A nomogram to predict seminal vesicle invasion by the extent and location of cancer in systematic biopsy results.J. Urol.20031704 Part 11203120810.1097/01.ju.0000085074.62960.7b14501725
     [Google Scholar]
  24. FineS.W. Al-AhmadieH.A. GopalanA. TickooS.K. ScardinoP.T. ReuterV.E. Anatomy of the anterior prostate and extraprostatic space: A contemporary surgical pathology analysis.Adv. Anat. Pathol.200714640140710.1097/PAP.0b013e3181597a9c18049129
     [Google Scholar]
  25. McNealJ.E. HaillotO. Patterns of spread of adenocarcinoma in the prostate as related to cancer volume.Prostate2001491485710.1002/pros.111711550210
     [Google Scholar]
  26. VillersA. McNealJ.E. RedwineE.A. FreihaF.S. StameyT.A. The role of perineural space invasion in the local spread of prostatic adenocarcinoma.J. Urol.1989142376376810.1016/S0022‑5347(17)38881‑X2769857
     [Google Scholar]
  27. McNealJ.E. RedwineE.A. FreihaF.S. StameyT.A. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread.Am. J. Surg. Pathol.1988121289790610.1097/00000478‑198812000‑000013202246
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ChenC. ShenJ. XingZ. JiangC. HuL. CuiL. XueD. HeX. XuR. Significance of examined lymph-node count in accurate staging and long-term survival in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: A population-based study.Int. Urol. Nephrol.202052227127810.1007/s11255‑019‑02300‑431571158
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737
Loading
Assessment of Diagnostic Performance of Risk Factors Affecting Extraprostatic Extension: Role of Zonal Level of Prostate Cancer
Curr. Med. Imaging 20, E080923220826 (2024); https://doi.org/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230908111737
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material is available on the publisher’s website along with the published article.

file format download Download

  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): Extraprostatic extension; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoplasm staging; Neoplasms; Prostate

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test