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