Introduction: Before radical prostatectomy (RP), a nomogram [Briganti et al., Eur Urol 2012;61:584-592] permits to measure the probability of specimen-confined (SC) disease (pT2-pT3a, node negative with negative margins) in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of our study was to perform an external validation of this nomogram. Materials and Methods: Between 2007 and 2011, 623 patients with high-risk PCa (prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20 ng/ml and/or biopsy Gleason score ≥8 and/or clinical stage T3) underwent RP and pelvic lymph node dissection at tertiary referral centers. Multivariable logistic regression models predicting the presence of SC disease were built in; we then used the area under curve of the receiver operating characteristic analysis to quantify accuracy of the nomogram to predict SC disease. The extent of over- or underestimation was evaluated within calibration plots. Results: 29% (181/623) of men had SC disease at RP. Preoperative PSA, biopsy Gleason score and stage differed significantly (all p < 0.001) between men with SC disease and those without. External validation of the nomogram showed an acceptable accuracy (area under curve: 66.3, 95% CI 62.4-70%) and a perfect calibration plot. Conclusions: The external cohort validates the original nomogram, with perfect calibration characteristics. The adequate although reduced accuracy may reflect the wide spectrum and behavior of the so-called high-risk PCa.

Keywords:
Radical prostatectomy, High-risk prostate cancer, Nomogram
1.
Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al: Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2006;56:106-130.
2.
Ung JO, Richie JP, Chen MH, et al: Evolution of the presentation and pathologic and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed during the PSA era. Urology 2002;60:458-463.
3.
Okihara K, Nakanishi H, Nakamura T, et al: Clinical characteristic of prostate cancer in Japanese men in the eras before and after serum prostate-specific antigen testing. In J Urol 2005;12:662-667.
4.
Ward J, Slezak JM, Blute ML, et al: Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int 2005;95:751.
5.
Heidenreich A, Bolla M, Joniau S, et al: EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Update 2009.
6.
Walz J, Joniau S, Chun FK, et al: Pathological results and rates of treatment failure in high-risk prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2011;107:765-770.
7.
Loeb S, Schaeffer EM, Trock BJ, Epstein JI, Humphreys EB, Walsh PC: What are the outcomes of radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer? Urology 2010;76:710-714.
8.
Donohue JF, Bianco FJ Jr, Kuroiwa K, et al: Poorly differentiated prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: long-term outcome and incidence of pathological downgrading. J Urol 2006;176:991-995.
9.
Briganti A, Joniau S, Gontero P, Abdollah F, Passoni NM, Tombal B, Marchioro G, Kneitz B, Walz J, Frohneberg D, Bangma CH, Graefen M, Tizzani A, Frea B, Karnes RJ, Montorsi F, Van Poppel H, Spahn M: Identifying the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2012;61:584-592.
10.
Lughezzani G, Briganti A, Karakiewicz PI, Kattan MW, Montorsi F, Shariat SF, Vickers AJ: Predictive and prognostic models in radical prostatectomy candidates: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol 2010;58:687-700.
11.
Gontero P, Marchioro G, Pisani R, et al: Is radical prostatectomy feasible in all cases of locally advanced non-bone metastatic prostate cancer? Results of a single-institution study. Eur Urol 2006;51:922-929.
12.
Carver BS, Bianco FJ, Scardino PT, et al: Long-term outcome following radical prostatectomy in men with clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. J Urol 2006;176:564-568.
13.
De la Riva IM, Lopez-Tomasety BJ, Dominiguez MR, et al: Radical prostatectomy as monotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer (T3a): 12 years' follow-up. Arch Esp Urol 2004;57:679-692.
14.
Xylinas E, Drouin SJ, Comperat E, et al: Oncological control after radical prostatectomy in men with clinical T3 prostate cancer: a single-centre experience. BJU Int 2008;103:1173-1178.
15.
Bastian PJ, Boorjian SA, Bossi A, Briganti A, Heidenreich A, Freedland SJ, Stief CG, Montorsi F, Stephenson AJ, Roach M III, Zelefsky MJ, Schroder F, van Poppel H: High-risk prostate cancer: from definition to contemporary management. Eur Urol 2012;61:1096-1106.
16.
Rubio-Briones J, Iborra I, Trassierra M, Collado A, Casanova J, Gómez-Ferrer A, Ricós JV, Monrós JL, Dumont R, Solsona E: Metastatic progression, cancer-specific mortality and need for secondary treatments in patients with clinically high-risk prostate cancer treated initially with radical prostatectomy. Actas Urol Esp 2010;34:610-617.
17.
Loeb S, Smith DN, Roehl KA, Catalona WJ: Intermediate-term potency, continence, and survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy for clinically high-risk or locally advanced prostate cancer. Urology 2007;69:1170-1175.
18.
Masson-Lecomte A, Vaessen C, Bitker MO, Hupertan V, Chartier-Kastler E, Roupre M, Comperat E, Cussenot O: Pathological findings and oncological control afforded by radical prostatectomy in men with high-risk prostate cancer: a single-centre study. World J Urol 2011;29:665-670.
19.
Van Poppel H, Joniau S: An analysis of radical prostatectomy in advanced stage and high-grade prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2008;53:253-259.
20.
Schiavina R, Borghesi M, Brunocilla E, Manferrari F, Fiorentino M, Vagnoni V, Baccos A, Pultrone C, Rocca C, Rizzi S, Martorana G: Differing risk of cancer death among patients with lymph node metastasis after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: identification of risk categories according to number of positive nodes and Gleason score. BJU Int 2012;111:1237-1244.
21.
Pilepich MV, Winter K, Lawton CA, et al: Androgen suppression adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy in prostate carcinoma - long-term results of phase III RTOG 85-31. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:1285-1290.
22.
Swanson G, Thompson I, Basler J, et al: Metastatic prostate cancer-does treatment of the primary tumor matter? J Urol 2006;176:1292-1298.
23.
Akakura K, Suzuki H, Ichikawa T, et al: A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy plus endocrine therapy versus external beam radiotherapy plus endocrine therapy for locally advanced prostate cancer: results at median follow-up of 102 months. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2006;36:789-793.
24.
Tewari A, Divine G, Chang P, et al: Long-term survival in men with high-grade prostate cancer: a comparison between conservative treatment, radiation therapy and radical prostatectomy - a propensity scoring approach. J Urol 2007;177:911-915.
25.
Joniau S, Hsu CY, Lerut E, et al: A pretreatment table for the prediction of final histopathology after radical prostatectomy in clinical unilateral T3a prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2007;51:388-396.
26.
Lodde M, Harel F, Lacombe L, Fradet Y: Substratification of high-risk localised prostate cancer treated by radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 2008;26:225-229.
27.
Ploussard G, Masson-Lecomte A, Beauval JB, Ouzzane A, Bonniol R, Buge F, Fadli S, Rouprêt M, Rebillard X, Gaschignard N, Pfister C, Villers A, Soulié M, Salomon L: Radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer Defined by preoperative criteria: oncologic follow-up in a national multicenter study in 813 patients and assessment of easy-to-use prognostic Substratification Urology 2011;78:607-613.
28.
Spahn M, Joniau S, Gontero P, Fieuws S, Marchioro G, Tombal B, Kneitz B, Hsu CY, Van Der Eeckt K, Bader P, Frohneberg D, Tizzani A, Van Poppel H: Outcome predictors of radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate-specific antigen greater than 20 ng/ml: a European multi-institutional study of 712 patients. Eur Urol 2010;58:1-7.
29.
Hansen J, Rink M, Becker A, Ahyai SA, Steuber T, Briganti A, Graefen M, Chun FKH: External validation of a nomogram to identify the best candidate for radical prostatectomy among high-risk prostate cancer patients. Nordkongress Urologie, Hamburg, April 18-20, 2013.
30.
Vergouwe Y, Steyerberg EW, Eijkemans MJ, Habbema JD: Validity of prognostic models: when is a model clinically useful? Semin Urol Oncol 2002;20:96-107.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.