External Validation and Comparison of Two Nomograms Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement in Patients subjected to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Concomitant Lymph Node Dissection: A Single Tertiary Center Experience in the MRI-Era

Abstract

IntroductionTo externally validate and directly compare the performance of the Briganti 2012 and Briganti 2019 nomograms as predictors of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a cohort of patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND).Materials and MethodsAfter the exclusion of patients with incomplete biopsy, imaging, or clinical data, 752 patients who underwent RARP and ePLND between December 2014 to August 2021 at our center, were included. Among these patients, 327 (43.5%) had undergone multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) and mpMRI-targeted biopsy. The preoperative risk of LNI was calculated for all patients using the Briganti 2012 nomogram, while the Briganti 2019 nomogram was used only in patients who had performed mpMRI with the combination of targeted and systematic biopsy. The performances of Briganti 2012 and 2019 models were evaluated using the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis, calibrations plot, and decision curve analysis.ResultsA median of 13 (IQR 9–18) nodes per patient was removed, and 78 (10.4%) patients had LNI at final pathology. The area under the curves (AUCs) for Briganti 2012 and 2019 were 0.84 and 0.82, respectively. The calibration plots showed a good correlation between the predicted probabilities and the observed proportion of LNI for both models, with a slight tendency to underestimation. The decision curve analysis (DCA) of the two models was similar, with a slightly higher net benefit for Briganti 2012 nomogram. In patients receiving both systematic- and targeted-biopsy, the Briganti 2012 accuracy was 0.85, and no significant difference was found between the AUCs of 2012 and 2019 nomograms (p = 0.296). In the sub-cohort of 518 (68.9%) intermediate-risk PCa patients, the Briganti 2012 nomogram outperforms the 2019 model in terms of accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.77), calibration curve, and net benefit at DCA.ConclusionThe direct comparison of the two nomograms showed that the most updated nomogram, which included MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy data, was not significantly more accurate than the 2012 model in the prediction of LNI, suggesting a negligible role of mpMRI in the current population.

Comparison of Four Validated Nomograms (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Briganti 2012, 2017, and 2019) Predicting Lymph Node Invasion in Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer Candidates for Radical Prostatectomy and Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: Clinical Experience and Review of the Literature

“…Using a cut-off of 5% or 7% in terms of estimated risk for pN+ results in missing a very low percentage of cases with LNI [ 3 , 4 , 7 , 8 ]. On the other hand, in daily practice, a relevant percentage of cases show no LNI at the final histopathological assay (pN0) after ePLND [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. In fact, it has been demonstrated that when the choice of whether to perform ePLND relies on well-established preoperative nomograms, most patients, including those with high-risk diseases, have no LNI at final pathology [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ].…”

“…To date, in the literature, there are several studies investigating the accuracy of nomograms [ 8 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. However, few studies have directly compared the accuracy of MSKCC, Briganti 2012, 2017, and 2019 nomograms.…”