• Actas Urol Esp · Nov 2014

    Optimizing D'Amico risk groups in radical prostatectomy through the addition of magnetic resonance imaging data.

    • R Algarra, B Zudaire, A Tienza, J M Velis, A Rincón, I Pascual, and J Zudaire.
    • Departamento de Urología, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, España. Electronic address: ralgarra@unav.es.
    • Actas Urol Esp. 2014 Nov 1; 38 (9): 594-9.

    ObjectivesTo improve the predictive efficacy of the D'Amico risk classification system with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pelvis.Material And MethodsWe studied 729 patients from a series of 1310 radical prostatectomies for T1-T2 prostate cancer who underwent staging pelvic MRI. Each patient was classified with T2, T3a or T3b MRI, and N (+) patients were excluded. We identified the therapeutic factors that affected the biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) time (prostate specific antigen [PSA] levels>0.4ng/mL) using a univariate and multivariate study with Cox models. We attempted to improve the predictive power of the D'Amico model (low risk: T1; Gleason 2-6; PSA levels<10ng/mL; intermediate risk: T2 or Gleason 7 or PSA levels 10-20ng/mL; high risk: T3 or Gleason 8-10 or PSA levels>20ng/mL).ResultsIn the univariate study, the clinical factors that influenced BPFS were the following: Gleason 7 (HR: 1.7); Gleason 8-10 (HR: 2.9); T2 (HR: 1.6); PSA levels 10-20 (HR: 2); PSA levels>20 (HR: 4.3); D'Amico intermediate (HR: 2.1) and high (HR: 4.8) risk; T3a MRI (HR: 2.3) and T3b MRI (HR: 4.5). In the multivariate study, the only variables that affected BPFS were the following: D'Amico intermediate risk (HR: 2; 95% CI 1.2-3.3); D'Amico high risk (HR: 4.1; 95% CI 2.4-6.8); T3a MRI (HR: 1.9; 95% CI 1.2-2.9) and T3b MRI (HR: 3.9; 95% CI 2.5-6.1). Predictive model: Using the multivariate Cox models, we assessed the weight of each variable. A value of 1 was given to D'Amico low risk and T2 MRI; a value of 2 was given to D'Amico intermediate risk and T3a MRI and a value 3 was given to D'Amico high risk and T3b MRI. Each patient had a marker that varied between 2 and 6. The best model included 3 groups, as follows: 494 (67.7%) patients in group 1, with a score of 2-3 points (HR, 1), a BPFS of 86%±2% and 79%±2% at 5 and 10 years, respectively; 179 (24.6%) patients in group 2, with a score of 4 points (HR, 3), a BPFS of 60%±4% and 54%±5% at 5 and 10 years, respectively; and 56 (7.7%) patients in group 3, with a score of 5-6 points (HR, 9.3), a BPFS of 29%±8% and 19%±7% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. The median BPFS time was 1.5 years.ConclusionMRI data significantly improves the predictive capacity of BPFS when using the D'Amico model data.Copyright © 2013 AEU. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.