Prognostic significance for long-term outcomes following radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer: Evaluation with prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2

14Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To retrospectively determine whether the use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 (v2) helps predict long-term outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa) patients following radical prostatectomy (RP). Materials and Methods: A total of 166 patients with localized PCa evaluated with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) at 3T before RP were enrolled. Three groups were created based on PI-RADS v2 score used to predict clinical outcomes: group A, ≥ 3; group B, ≥ 4; group C, 5. We calculated biochemical recurrence-free survival (RFS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Cox proportion hazards models were used to identify variables predictive of biochemical recurrence and disease progression. Results: During a median follow-up of 9.1 years, biochemical recurrence occurred in 67 patients (40.4%) and disease progression occurred in 55 patients (33.1%). In all groups, 10-year RFS and 10-year PFS were significantly lower for PI-RADS scores ≥ 3, ≥ 4 and 5 than for score < 3, < 4 and < 5 (p < 0.05), respectively. In multivariate analysis, PI-RADS score ≥ 3 and score 5 were significant independent risk marker for biochemical recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.58, p = 0.018; HR = 1.75, p = 0.033) and disease progression (HR = 3.99, p = 0.047; HR = 2.31, p = 0.040). Moderate inter-observer agreement was seen for PI-RADS scoring. Conclusion: PI-RADS v2 may be used to predict long-term outcomes following RP in PCa.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim, R., Kim, C. K., Park, J. J., Kim, J. H., Seo, S. I., Jeon, S. S., & Lee, H. M. (2019). Prognostic significance for long-term outcomes following radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer: Evaluation with prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Korean Journal of Radiology, 20(2), 256–264. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.0613

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free