PURPOSE: The 2011 NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines for prostate cancer recommend pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy in all individuals with a nomogram predicted lymph node invasion probability of 2% or greater. We examined the ability of these guidelines to correctly predict lymph node invasion in patients treated with extended pelvic lymph node dissection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 3,064 consecutive patients treated with radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection between 2000 and 2010. We formally validated the NCCN guideline nomogram using discrimination, calibration and decision curve analysis as benchmarks. Moreover the performance characteristics of the 2% nomogram cutoff as well as other cutoff values (range 1% to 10%) were tested. RESULTS: Overall 10.0% of patients had lymph node invasion. The discrimination accuracy of the NCCN guideline nomogram was 79.8%, with a maximum underestimation of the lymph node invasion risk of 41.2%. On decision curve analysis the NCCN nomogram fared better than not performing pelvic lymph node dissection in all patients. However, in the prediction range between 0% and 9% the nomogram did not fare better than performing pelvic lymph node dissection in all patients. The use of the 2% cutoff would allow the avoidance of 49.3% of pelvic lymph node dissections, at the cost of missing 20.3% of patients with lymph node invasion. CONCLUSIONS: The NCCN nomogram tends to significantly underestimate the real lymph node invasion rate. Moreover the use of the currently recommended cutoff of 2% to trigger pelvic lymph node dissection might not be appropriate.
PURPOSE: The 2011 NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines for prostate cancer recommend pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy in all individuals with a nomogram predicted lymph node invasion probability of 2% or greater. We examined the ability of these guidelines to correctly predict lymph node invasion in patients treated with extended pelvic lymph node dissection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 3,064 consecutive patients treated with radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection between 2000 and 2010. We formally validated the NCCN guideline nomogram using discrimination, calibration and decision curve analysis as benchmarks. Moreover the performance characteristics of the 2% nomogram cutoff as well as other cutoff values (range 1% to 10%) were tested. RESULTS: Overall 10.0% of patients had lymph node invasion. The discrimination accuracy of the NCCN guideline nomogram was 79.8%, with a maximum underestimation of the lymph node invasion risk of 41.2%. On decision curve analysis the NCCN nomogram fared better than not performing pelvic lymph node dissection in all patients. However, in the prediction range between 0% and 9% the nomogram did not fare better than performing pelvic lymph node dissection in all patients. The use of the 2% cutoff would allow the avoidance of 49.3% of pelvic lymph node dissections, at the cost of missing 20.3% of patients with lymph node invasion. CONCLUSIONS: The NCCN nomogram tends to significantly underestimate the real lymph node invasion rate. Moreover the use of the currently recommended cutoff of 2% to trigger pelvic lymph node dissection might not be appropriate.
Authors: Massimiliano Spaliviero; Stefan Harmsen; Ruimin Huang; Matthew A Wall; Chrysafis Andreou; James A Eastham; Karim A Touijer; Peter T Scardino; Moritz F Kircher Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Michael A Liss; Kerrin Palazzi; Sean P Stroup; Ramzi Jabaji; Omer A Raheem; Christopher J Kane Journal: World J Urol Date: 2013-03-20 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ian C Bostock; Wayne Hofstetter; Reza Mehran; Ravi Rajaram; David Rice; Boris Sepesi; Stephen Swisher; Ara Vaporciyan; Garrett Walsh; Mara B Antonoff Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 2.895