Marco Bandini1,2, Michele Marchioni2,3, Raisa S Pompe2,4, Zhe Tian2, Giorgio Gandaglia1, Nicola Fossati1, Firas Abdollah5, Markus Graefen4, Francesco Montorsi1, Fred Saad2, Shahrokh F Shariat6, Alberto Briganti1, Pierre I Karakiewicz2. 1. Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele and Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 2. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada. 3. Department of Urology, SS Annunziata Hospital, 'G. D'Annunzio' University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy. 4. Martini Klinik, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 5. Vattikuti Urology Institute and VUI Center for Outcomes Research Analytics and Evaluation (VCORE), Henry Ford Hospital, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA. 6. Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To perform a head-to-head comparison of four nomograms; namely, the Cagiannos, the 2012-Briganti, the Godoy and the online-Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), for prediction of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a North American population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 19 775 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) who had undergone radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) were identified within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. All four nomograms were tested using Heagerty's concordance index (C-index), calibration plots and decision curve analysis (DCA). In addition, we examined specific nomogram-derived thresholds to compare the number of avoided PLNDs and missed LNI-positive cases. RESULTS: All nomograms were found to have highly comparable C-index values: the Cagiannos, 78.6%; the Godoy, 78.2%; the 2012-Briganti, 79.8%; and the MSKCC, 79.9%. The Cagiannos nomogram showed the best calibration, followed by the 2012-Briganti, the Godoy and the online-MSKCC. In DCA, the 2012-Briganti and the Cagiannos, in that order, provided the best results, followed by the Godoy and the online-MSKCC models. For each nomogram, the threshold associated with ≤10% missed LNI cases avoided 8 693 (46.6%), 8 652 (46.4%), 8 461 (45.4%) and 8 590 (46.1%) PLNDs, respectively, with the use of the Cagiannos (2.6% threshold), the online-MSKCC (4.3% threshold), the Godoy (3.6% threshold) and the 2012-Briganti (4.6% threshold) nomograms. CONCLUSION: The Cagiannos and the 2012-Briganti nomograms exhibited the best calibrations and DCA results. Conversely, C-index values and ability to avoid unnecessary PLNDs were virtually the same for all four nomograms examined.
OBJECTIVES: To perform a head-to-head comparison of four nomograms; namely, the Cagiannos, the 2012-Briganti, the Godoy and the online-Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), for prediction of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a North American population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 19 775 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) who had undergone radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) were identified within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. All four nomograms were tested using Heagerty's concordance index (C-index), calibration plots and decision curve analysis (DCA). In addition, we examined specific nomogram-derived thresholds to compare the number of avoided PLNDs and missed LNI-positive cases. RESULTS: All nomograms were found to have highly comparable C-index values: the Cagiannos, 78.6%; the Godoy, 78.2%; the 2012-Briganti, 79.8%; and the MSKCC, 79.9%. The Cagiannos nomogram showed the best calibration, followed by the 2012-Briganti, the Godoy and the online-MSKCC. In DCA, the 2012-Briganti and the Cagiannos, in that order, provided the best results, followed by the Godoy and the online-MSKCC models. For each nomogram, the threshold associated with ≤10% missed LNI cases avoided 8 693 (46.6%), 8 652 (46.4%), 8 461 (45.4%) and 8 590 (46.1%) PLNDs, respectively, with the use of the Cagiannos (2.6% threshold), the online-MSKCC (4.3% threshold), the Godoy (3.6% threshold) and the 2012-Briganti (4.6% threshold) nomograms. CONCLUSION: The Cagiannos and the 2012-Briganti nomograms exhibited the best calibrations and DCA results. Conversely, C-index values and ability to avoid unnecessary PLNDs were virtually the same for all four nomograms examined.
Authors: Piotr Zapała; Łukasz Fus; Zbigniew Lewandowski; Karolina Garbas; Łukasz Zapała; Barbara Górnicka; Piotr Radziszewski Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-11-27 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Nicola Frego; Marco Paciotti; Nicolò Maria Buffi; Davide Maffei; Roberto Contieri; Pier Paolo Avolio; Vittorio Fasulo; Alessandro Uleri; Massimo Lazzeri; Rodolfo Hurle; Alberto Saita; Giorgio Ferruccio Guazzoni; Paolo Casale; Giovanni Lughezzani Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-02-25