Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 7, 2025
Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Development and External Validation of a Novel Nomogram to Predict Side-specific Extraprostatic Extension in Patients
Timo F W Soeterik1, Harm H E van Melick2, Lea M Dijksman3
1Department of Value-Based Healthcare, Santeon Group, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein/Utrecht, Netherlands.
Background:
Prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension (EPE) is crucial in selecting patients for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP).
Objective:
To develop and externally validate nomograms including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) information to predict side-specific EPE.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
A retrospective analysis of 1870 consecutive prostate cancer patients who underwent robot-assisted RP from 2014 to 2018 at three institutions.
Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis:
Four multivariable logistic regression models were established, including combinations of patient-based and side-specific variables: prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, highest ipsilateral International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) biopsy grade, ipsilateral percentage of positive cores on systematic biopsy, and side-specific clinical stage assessed by both digital rectal examination and mpMRI. Discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]), calibration, and net benefit of these models were assessed in the development cohort and two external validation cohorts.
Results And Limitations:
On external validation, AUCs of the four models ranged from 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.88) to 0.83 (95% CI 0.72-0.90) in cohort 1 and from 0.77 (95% CI 0.62-0.87) to 0.78 (95% CI 0.64-0.88) in cohort 2. The three models including mpMRI staging information resulted in relatively higher AUCs compared with the model without mpMRI information. No major differences between the four models regarding net benefit were established. The model based on PSA density, ISUP grade, and mpMRI T stage was superior in terms of calibration. Using this model with a cut-off of 20%, 1980/2908 (68%) prostatic lobes without EPE would be found eligible for nerve sparing, whereas non-nerve sparing would be advised in 642/832 (77%) lobes with EPE.
Conclusions:
Our analysis resulted in a simple and robust nomogram for the prediction of side-specific EPE, which should be used to select patients for nerve-sparing RP.
Patient Summary:
We developed a prediction model that can be used to assess accurately the likelihood of tumour extension outside the prostate. This tool can guide patient selection for safe nerve-sparing surgery.
