Literature DB >> 21873255

Prostate cancer: prediction of biochemical failure after external-beam radiation therapy--Kattan nomogram and endorectal MR imaging estimation of tumor volume.

Antonio C Westphalen1, Walter J Koff, Fergus V Coakley, Valdair F Muglia, John M Neuhaus, Ralph T Marcus, John Kurhanewicz, Rebecca Smith-Bindman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging findings can improve predictions made with the Kattan nomogram for radiation therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved this retrospective HIPAA-compliant study. Ninety-nine men who underwent endorectal MR and MR spectroscopy before external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer (January 1998 to June 2007) were included. Linear predictors were calculated with input variables from the study sample and the Kattan original coefficients. The linear predictor is a single weighted value that combines information of all predictor variables in a model, where the weight of each value is its association with the outcome. Two radiologists independently reviewed all MR images to determine extent of disease; a third independent reader resolved discrepancies. Biochemical failure was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level of 2 ng/mL (2 μg/L) or more above nadir. Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the probabilities of treatment failure (biochemical failure) in 5 years. One model included only the Kattan nomogram data; the other also incorporated imaging findings. The discrimination performance of all models was determined with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analyses. These analyses were followed by an assessment of net risk reclassification.
RESULTS: The areas under the ROC curve for the Kattan nomogram and the model incorporating MR imaging findings were 61.1% (95% confidence interval: 58.1%, 64.0%) and 78.0% (95% confidence interval: 75.7%, 80.4%), respectively. Comparison of performance showed that the model with imaging findings performed significantly better than did the model with clinical variables alone (P < .001). Overall, the addition of imaging findings led to an improvement in risk classification of about 28%, ranging from approximately a minimum of 16% to a maximum of 39%, depending on the risk change considered important.
CONCLUSION: MR imaging data improve the prediction of biochemical failure with the Kattan nomogram after external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer. The number needed to image to improve the prediction of biochemical failure in one patient ranged from three to six. RSNA, 2011

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21873255      PMCID: PMC3198223          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11110457

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  49 in total

1.  Dualband spectral-spatial RF pulses for prostate MR spectroscopic imaging.

Authors:  A A Schricker; J M Pauly; J Kurhanewicz; M G Swanson; D B Vigneron
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  3-D computer visualization and interactive prostate biopsy simulation leads to an improved systematic technique for the detection of prostate cancer: clinical correlation.

Authors:  J J Bauer; J Zeng; W Zhang; D G McLeod; I A Sesterhenn; R R Connelly; S K Mun; J W Moul
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2000

3.  Improved solvent suppression and increased spatial excitation bandwidths for three-dimensional PRESS CSI using phase-compensating spectral/spatial spin-echo pulses.

Authors:  J Star-Lack; D B Vigneron; J Pauly; J Kurhanewicz; S J Nelson
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1997 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Prostate cancer nomograms: an update.

Authors:  Felix K-H Chun; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Alberto Briganti; Andrea Gallina; Michael W Kattan; Francesco Montorsi; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-08-11       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Prostate cancer: correlation of MR imaging and MR spectroscopy with pathologic findings after radiation therapy-initial experience.

Authors:  Darko Pucar; Amita Shukla-Dave; Hedvig Hricak; Chaya S Moskowitz; Kentaro Kuroiwa; Semra Olgac; Lanie E Ebora; Peter T Scardino; Jason A Koutcher; Kristen L Zakian
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-06-21       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Prostate depiction at endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging: investigation of a standardized evaluation system.

Authors:  Juyoung A Jung; Fergus V Coakley; Daniel B Vigneron; Mark G Swanson; Aliya Qayyum; Vivian Weinberg; Kirk D Jones; Peter R Carroll; John Kurhanewicz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Long-term results with immediate androgen suppression and external irradiation in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer (an EORTC study): a phase III randomised trial.

Authors:  Michel Bolla; Laurence Collette; Léo Blank; Padraig Warde; Jean Bernard Dubois; René-Olivier Mirimanoff; Guy Storme; Jacques Bernier; Abraham Kuten; Cora Sternberg; Johan Mattelaer; José Lopez Torecilla; J Rafael Pfeffer; Carmel Lino Cutajar; Alfredo Zurlo; Marianne Pierart
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-07-13       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Pretreatment nomogram predicting ten-year biochemical outcome of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Michael J Zelefsky; Michael W Kattan; Paul Fearn; Bertha L Fearon; Jason P Stasi; Alison M Shippy; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Pretreatment endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging features of prostate cancer as predictors of response to external beam radiotherapy.

Authors:  Tim Joseph; David A McKenna; Antonio C Westphalen; Fergus V Coakley; Shoujun Zhao; Ying Lu; I-Chow Hsu; Mack Roach; John Kurhanewicz
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Prostate cancer: role of pretreatment MR in predicting outcome after external-beam radiation therapy--initial experience.

Authors:  David A McKenna; Fergus V Coakley; Antonio C Westphalen; Shoujun Zhao; Ying Lu; Emily M Webb; Barby Pickett; Mack Roach; John Kurhanewicz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-02-07       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  10 in total

1.  Prediction of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy with PI-RADS version 2 in prostate cancers: initial results.

Authors:  Sung Yoon Park; Young Taik Oh; Dae Chul Jung; Nam Hoon Cho; Young Deuk Choi; Koon Ho Rha; Sung Joon Hong
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Prognostic Value of Pretreatment MRI in Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Sungmin Woo; Sangwon Han; Tae-Hyung Kim; Chong Hyun Suh; Antonio C Westphalen; Hedvig Hricak; Michael J Zelefsky; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 3.  Advances in imaging and in non-surgical salvage treatments after radiorecurrence in prostate cancer: what does the oncologist, radiotherapist and radiologist need to know?

Authors:  Giovanni Luca Gravina; Vincenzo Tombolini; Mario Di Staso; Pietro Franzese; Pierluigi Bonfili; Antonio Gennarelli; Leda Di Nicola; Carlo Masciocchi; Ernesto Di Cesare
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-07-14       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Development of ProCaRS Clinical Nomograms for Biochemical Failure-free Survival Following Either Low-Dose Rate Brachytherapy or Conventionally Fractionated External Beam Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Andrew Warner; Tom Pickles; Juanita Crook; Andre-Guy Martin; Luis Souhami; Charles Catton; Himu Lukka; George Rodrigues
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2015-06-11

5.  PREDICT: model for prediction of survival in localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Linda G W Kerkmeijer; Evelyn M Monninkhof; Inge M van Oort; Henk G van der Poel; Gert de Meerleer; Marco van Vulpen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Disparities in staging prostate magnetic resonance imaging utilization for nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients undergoing definitive radiation therapy.

Authors:  Ayobami Ajayi; Wei-Ting Hwang; Neha Vapiwala; Mark Rosen; Christina H Chapman; Stefan Both; Meera Shah; Xingmei Wang; Atu Agawu; Peter Gabriel; John Christodouleas; Zelig Tochner; Curtiland Deville
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2016-07-25

Review 7.  An appraisal of analytical tools used in predicting clinical outcomes following radiation therapy treatment of men with prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Elspeth Raymond; Michael E O'Callaghan; Jared Campbell; Andrew D Vincent; Kerri Beckmann; David Roder; Sue Evans; John McNeil; Jeremy Millar; John Zalcberg; Martin Borg; Kim Moretti
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 3.481

8.  Biochemical recurrence prediction after radiotherapy for prostate cancer with T2w magnetic resonance imaging radiomic features.

Authors:  Catarina Dinis Fernandes; Cuong V Dinh; Iris Walraven; Stijn W Heijmink; Milena Smolic; Joost J M van Griethuysen; Rita Simões; Are Losnegård; Henk G van der Poel; Floris J Pos; Uulke A van der Heide
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-08-06

9.  Quantitative transrectal shear wave elastography undergoing salvage extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy following failed radiotherapy.

Authors:  Cheng Wei; Magdalena Szewczyk-Bieda; Paddy Nibblok; E Brown; Stephen Lang; Ghulam Nabi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 10.  MRI in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mahyar Ghafoori; Manijeh Alavi; Mounes Aliyari Ghasabeh
Journal:  Iran Red Crescent Med J       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 0.611

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.