BACKGROUND: Data regarding the prognostic significance of tumor volume (TV) in prostate cancer are conflicting. Herein, we evaluated the association of TV with prostate cancer mortality following radical prostatectomy (RP), and assessed the additive prognostic value of TV to an established predictive model. METHODS: We identified 13,687 patients who underwent RP without preoperative therapy between 1987 and 2009. TV was estimated using the prolate ellipsoid formula. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to evaluate the association of TV with mortality. The ability of TV to enhance the performance of an established prognostic model (Mayo Clinic GPSM (Gleason, PSA, seminal vesicle and margin status) score) was assessed using the c-index. RESULTS: Median TV was 1.57 cm(3) (interquartile range (IQR) 0.48-4.19). Increasing TV was associated with significantly higher risks of seminal vesicle invasion (hazard ratio (HR) 1.58; P<0.0001), positive surgical margins (HR 1.28; P<0.0001) and lymph node involvement (HR 1.26; P<0.0001). Median postoperative follow-up was 9.4 years (IQR 5.0-14.5). Patient grouping into quartiles according to TV resulted in a significant stratification of outcome, as the 15-year cancer-specific survival by TV quartile was 99%, 98%, 95% and 88%, respectively (P<0.0001). Moreover, on multivariate analysis, greater TV remained associated with significantly increased risks of systemic progression (HR 1.27; P<0.0001), death from prostate cancer (HR 1.29; P<0.0001) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.05; P<0.0001). Meanwhile, addition of TV to the GPSM score increased the c-index for the model's prediction of prostate cancer mortality from 0.803 to 0.822. CONCLUSIONS: TV is associated with survival following RP, and enhances, although modestly, the performance of an established prediction model. As such, TV warrants continued assessment in risk stratification tools.
BACKGROUND: Data regarding the prognostic significance of tumor volume (TV) in prostate cancer are conflicting. Herein, we evaluated the association of TV with prostate cancer mortality following radical prostatectomy (RP), and assessed the additive prognostic value of TV to an established predictive model. METHODS: We identified 13,687 patients who underwent RP without preoperative therapy between 1987 and 2009. TV was estimated using the prolate ellipsoid formula. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to evaluate the association of TV with mortality. The ability of TV to enhance the performance of an established prognostic model (Mayo Clinic GPSM (Gleason, PSA, seminal vesicle and margin status) score) was assessed using the c-index. RESULTS: Median TV was 1.57 cm(3) (interquartile range (IQR) 0.48-4.19). Increasing TV was associated with significantly higher risks of seminal vesicle invasion (hazard ratio (HR) 1.58; P<0.0001), positive surgical margins (HR 1.28; P<0.0001) and lymph node involvement (HR 1.26; P<0.0001). Median postoperative follow-up was 9.4 years (IQR 5.0-14.5). Patient grouping into quartiles according to TV resulted in a significant stratification of outcome, as the 15-year cancer-specific survival by TV quartile was 99%, 98%, 95% and 88%, respectively (P<0.0001). Moreover, on multivariate analysis, greater TV remained associated with significantly increased risks of systemic progression (HR 1.27; P<0.0001), death from prostate cancer (HR 1.29; P<0.0001) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.05; P<0.0001). Meanwhile, addition of TV to the GPSM score increased the c-index for the model's prediction of prostate cancer mortality from 0.803 to 0.822. CONCLUSIONS: TV is associated with survival following RP, and enhances, although modestly, the performance of an established prediction model. As such, TV warrants continued assessment in risk stratification tools.
Authors: Giorgio Brembilla; Paolo Dell'Oglio; Armando Stabile; Alessandro Ambrosi; Giulia Cristel; Lisa Brunetti; Anna Damascelli; Massimo Freschi; Antonio Esposito; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi; Alessandro Del Maschio; Francesco De Cobelli Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Dordaneh Sugano; Abhinav Sidana; Amit L Jain; Brian Calio; Sonia Gaur; Mahir Maruf; Maria Merino; Peter Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Sonia Gaur; Stephanie Harmon; Sherif Mehralivand; Sandra Bednarova; Brian P Calio; Dordaneh Sugano; Abhinav Sidana; Maria J Merino; Peter A Pinto; Bradford J Wood; Joanna H Shih; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-03-31 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jorge Abreu-Gomez; Daniel Walker; Tareq Alotaibi; Matthew D F McInnes; Trevor A Flood; Nicola Schieda Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-03-24 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Roberto Bianchi; Gabriele Cozzi; Giuseppe Petralia; Sarah Alessi; Giuseppe Renne; Danilo Bottero; Antonio Brescia; Antonio Cioffi; Giovanni Cordima; Matteo Ferro; Deliu Victor Matei; Federica Mazzoleni; Gennaro Musi; Francesco Alessandro Mistretta; Alessandro Serino; Valeria Maria Lucia Tringali; Ioan Coman; Ottavio De Cobelli Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Francesco Giganti; Vasilis Stavrinides; Armando Stabile; Elizabeth Osinibi; Clement Orczyk; Jan Philipp Radtke; Alex Freeman; Aiman Haider; Shonit Punwani; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton; Alex Kirkham; Caroline M Moore Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-09-21 Impact factor: 3.039