본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Prediction of Pathologic Findings with MRI-Based Clinical Staging Using the Bayesian Network Modeling in Prostate Cancer: A Radiation Oncologist Perspective

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류의학일반

초록

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a model for predicting pathologic extracapsular extension (ECE) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) while integrating magnetic resonance imaging-based T-staging (cTMRI, cT1c-cT3b). Materials and methods: A total of 1,915 who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2006-2016 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. We performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis as well as Bayesian network (BN) modeling based on possible confounding factors. The BN model was internally validated using 5-fold validation. Results: According to the multivariate logistic regression analysis, initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) (β=0.050, p < 0.001), percentage of positive biopsy cores (PPC) (β=0.033, p < 0.001), both lobe involvement on biopsy (β=0.359, p=0.009), Gleason score (β=0.358, p < 0.001), and cTMRI (β=0.259, p < 0.001) were significant factors for ECE. For SVI, iPSA (β=0.037, p < 0.001), PPC (β=0.024, p < 0.001), Gleason score (β=0.753, p < 0.001), and cTMRI (β=0.507, p < 0.001) showed statistical significance. BN models to predict ECE and SVI were also successfully established. The overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)/accuracy of the BN models were 0.76/73.0% and 0.88/89.6% for ECE and SVI, respectively. According to internal comparison between the BN model and Roach formula, BN model had improved AUC values for predicting ECE (0.76 vs. 0.74, p=0.060) and SVI (0.88 vs. 0.84, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Two models to predict pathologic ECE and SVI integrating cTMRI were established and installed on a separate website for public access to guide radiation oncologists.

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a model for predicting pathologic extracapsular extension (ECE) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) while integrating magnetic resonance imaging-based T-staging (cTMRI, cT1c-cT3b). Materials and methods: A total of 1,915 who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2006-2016 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. We performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis as well as Bayesian network (BN) modeling based on possible confounding factors. The BN model was internally validated using 5-fold validation. Results: According to the multivariate logistic regression analysis, initial prostate-specific antigen (iPSA) (β=0.050, p < 0.001), percentage of positive biopsy cores (PPC) (β=0.033, p < 0.001), both lobe involvement on biopsy (β=0.359, p=0.009), Gleason score (β=0.358, p < 0.001), and cTMRI (β=0.259, p < 0.001) were significant factors for ECE. For SVI, iPSA (β=0.037, p < 0.001), PPC (β=0.024, p < 0.001), Gleason score (β=0.753, p < 0.001), and cTMRI (β=0.507, p < 0.001) showed statistical significance. BN models to predict ECE and SVI were also successfully established. The overall area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)/accuracy of the BN models were 0.76/73.0% and 0.88/89.6% for ECE and SVI, respectively. According to internal comparison between the BN model and Roach formula, BN model had improved AUC values for predicting ECE (0.76 vs. 0.74, p=0.060) and SVI (0.88 vs. 0.84, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Two models to predict pathologic ECE and SVI integrating cTMRI were established and installed on a separate website for public access to guide radiation oncologists.

참고문헌 (31)

  1. Siegel RL, "Cancer statistics, 2019", CA Cancer J Clin, 69, pp.7~34 (2019)
  2. 정규원, "Cancer Statistics in Korea: Incidence, Mortality, Survival, and Prevalence in 2016", Cancer Research and Treatment, 51(2), pp.417~430 (2019), 대한암학회
  3. Parker C, "Prostate cancer : ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up", Ann Oncol, 31, pp.1119~1134 (2020)
  4. "Prostate Cancer, version 2.2020" (2020)[URL]
  5. Morgan SC, "Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: An ASTRO, ASCO, and AUA Evidence-Based Guideline", J Clin Oncol, pp.JCO1801097~ (2018)
  6. Salembier C, "ESTRO ACROP consensus guideline on CT-and MRI-based target volume delineation for primary radiation therapy of localized prostate cancer", Radiother Oncol, 127, pp.49~61 (2018)
  7. Leyh-Bannurah SR, "A proposal of a new nomogram for predicting upstaging in contemporary D’Amico low-risk prostate cancer patients", World J Urol, 35, pp.189~197 (2017)
  8. Buyyounouski MK, "Prostate cancer : major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual", CA Cancer J Clin, 67, pp.245~253 (2017)
  9. Feng TS, "Multiparametric MRI improves accuracy of clinical nomograms for predicting extracapsular extension of prostate cancer", Urology, 86, pp.332~337 (2015)
  10. Lebacle C, "Integration of MRI to clinical nomogram for predicting pathological stage before radical prostatectomy", World J Urol, 35, pp.1409~1415 (2017)
  11. Gupta RT, "Can radiologic staging with multiparametric MRI enhance the accuracy of the partin tables in predicting organ-confined prostate cancer?", AJR Am J Roentgenol, 207, pp.87~95 (2016)
  12. Gevaert O, "Predicting the prognosis of breast cancer by integrating clinical and microarray data with Bayesian networks", Bioinformatics, 22, pp.e184~e190 (2006)
  13. Cai ZQ, "Analysis of prognostic factors for survival after surgery for gallbladder cancer based on a Bayesian network", Sci Rep, 7, pp.293~ (2017)
  14. Cong LL, "Decision of surgical approach for advanced gallbladder adenocarcinoma based on a Bayesian network", J Surg Oncol, 116, pp.1123~1131 (2017)
  15. Husmeier D, "Advanced information and knowledge processing. Probabilistic modelling in bioinformatics. and medical informatics" (2005), Springer-Verlag
  16. Yang Y, "Information theory, inference, and learning algorithms", J Am Stat Assoc, 100, pp.1461~1462 (2012)
  17. Roach M 3rd, "Re : The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer", J Urol, 150, pp.1923~1924 (1993)
  18. DeLong ER, "Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves : a nonparametric approach", Biometrics, 44, pp.837~845 (1988)
  19. Hosmer DW Jr, "Applied logistic regression" (2013), John Wiley & Sons
  20. Catton CN, "Randomized trial of a hypofractionated radiation regimen for the treatment of localized prostate cancer", J Clin Oncol, 35, pp.1884~1890 (2017)
  21. Partin AW, "Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer : a multi-institutional update", JAMA, 277, pp.1445~1451 (1997)
  22. Dearnaley D, "Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer : 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial", Lancet Oncol, 17, pp.1047~1060 (2016)
  23. Ahmed HU, "Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy?", Nat Rev Clin Oncol, 6, pp.197~206 (2009)
  24. Muglia VF, "Endorectal MRI of prostate cancer : incremental prognostic importance of gross locally advanced disease", AJR Am J Roentgenol, 197, pp.1369~1374 (2011)
  25. Tsurumaki Y, "Predictors of seminal vesicle invasion before radical prostatectomy", Int J Urol, 13, pp.1501~1508 (2006)
  26. Guzzo TJ, "Preoperative parameters, including percent positive biopsy, in predicting seminal vesicle involvement in patients with prostate cancer", J Urol, 175, pp.518~521 (2006)
  27. Lieberfarb ME, "Using PSA, biopsy Gleason score, clinical stage, and the percentage of positive biopsies to identify optimal candidates for prostate-only radiation therapy", Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 53, pp.898~903 (2002)
  28. Murphy G, "The expanding role of MRI in prostate cancer", AJR Am J Roentgenol, 201, pp.1229~1238 (2013)
  29. Mehralivand S, "A grading system for the assessment of risk of extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer at multiparametric MRI", Radiology, 290, pp.709~719 (2019)
  30. Giannarini G, "Accuracy of abbreviated multiparametric MRI-derived protocols in predicting local staging of prostate cancer in men undergoing radical prostatectomy", Acta Radiol, 62, pp.949~958 (2021)
  31. Grivas N, "Seminal vesicle invasion on multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging : correlation with histopathology", Eur J Radiol, 98, pp.107~112 (2018)

관련 논문AI추천

Bilateral Seminal Vesicle Invasion as a Strong Prognostic Indicator in T3b Prostate Cancer Patients Following Radical Prostatectomy: A Comprehensive, Multi-Center, Long-Term Follow-Up Study곽철, 변석수, 서준교, 안한종, 이상철, 전성수, 전황균, 정인갑, 정창욱대한암학회 · Cancer Research and Treatment2024 · 제56권 제3호Radiomics Reproducibility in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis Based on PROSTATExJae-Seoung Kim, Sumin Jung대한배뇨장애요실금학회 · International Neurourology Journal2025 · 제29권 제4호Clinical Outcomes of Postoperative Radiotherapy Following Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study (KROG 18-01) of a Korean Population박원, 김영경, 김영석, 김재성, 김준상, 김진호, 남택근, 심수정, 위찬우, 이성욱, 정송미, 조관호, 조원경, 조재호, 최영민대한암학회 · Cancer Research and Treatment2020 · 제52권 제1호Integrating Deep Learning-Based Dose Distribution Prediction with Bayesian Networks for Decision Support in Radiotherapy for Upper Gastrointestinal cancer김동윤, 김은지, 장범섭, 지의규대한암학회 · Cancer Research and Treatment2025 · 제57권 제1호A Predictive Model Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Parameters for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population천준, 강석호, 강성구, 강하은, 노태일, 성득제, 심지성, 이정구, 진현정, 태종현, 현창완대한암학회 · Cancer Research and Treatment2021 · 제53권 제4호Optimal Definition of Biochemical Recurrence in Patients Who Receive Salvage Radiotherapy Following Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer박원, 김영경, 김영석, 김재성, 남택근, 이동은, 이성욱, 정송미, 조관호, 조재호, 최서희, 최영민대한암학회 · Cancer Research and Treatment2022 · 제54권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (29건)

Recommendations for the Use of Next-Generation Sequencing and the Molecular Tumor Board for Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Report from KSMO and KCSG Precision Medicine Networking Group김효송, 천재경, 임선민, 윤지나, 장대영, 차용준, 강진형, 박인근, 이인희, 김한상, 홍용상, 장세진, 윤홍석, 안희경, 윤신교, 김태원, 유창훈, 김인호, 김지현, 김진원, 김지훈, 김승태, 김미소, 정재호pp. 1-9Validation of the Korean Version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2.1 among Cancer Survivors윤정희, 임지현, 조주희, 남희수, 이만경, 복혜숙, 이상원, 김수연, 강은지, 안진석, 오동렬, 신수용, 김영하, 강단비, 심성근pp. 10-19Analysis of Cancer Patient Decision-Making and Health Service Utilization after Enforcement of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decision-Making Act in Korea김달용, Dae Seog Heo, 임채만, 유신혜, 신성준, 김도연, Min Sun Kim, 이현정, 서세영, 임지연pp. 20-29Comparison of the Data of a Next-Generation Sequencing Panel from K-MASTER Project with That of Orthogonal Methods for Detecting Targetable Genetic Alterations신상원, 임승택, 장원진, 박경화, 이종원, 강은주, 조성심, 김정선, 임태규, 김혜숙, 김유정, 이수현, 최정윤, 김주원, 조장호, 안미선, 임아름, 김영생, 박지현, 이영우, 정희준, 김열홍, 최윤지, 성재숙pp. 30-39Targeted Liquid Biopsy Using Irradiation to Facilitate the Release of Cell-Free DNA from a Spatially Aimed Tumor Tissue박지현, 안원균, 노재명, 표홍렬, 박웅양, 이호연, 김연정, 최창훈, 이태섭, 박동현pp. 40-53