Estimation of the extent of local prostate cancer spread according to magnetic resonance imaging findings and clinical prognostic factors

To estimate the extent of local tumor spread is a main goal in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC). The value of this criterion is that its clinical stage plays a key role in choosing a treatment policy. Overestimation of the clinical stage of cancer leads to the fact that specialists refuse radical and its underestimation gives rise to its recurrence. Our trial defined criteria for the diagnostic efficiency of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 150 PC patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy. The findings were as follows: the diagnostic sensitivity of the method in determining the spread of the cancer beyond the organ was 76.8 %; its diagnostic specificity and accuracy were 80.2 and 78.7 %, respectively. The positive predictive value in detecting the extra-organ spread of the tumor was equal to 76.8 %; the negative predictive value was 80.2 %. A prognostic classification of a risk for locally advanced PS has been developed using the independent clinical and MRI signs found.

1. Shukla-Dave A., Hricak H., Scardino P. T. Imaging low-risk prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2008;18:78–86.

2. Han M., Partin A. W., Zahurak M. et al. Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2003:1:517–23.

3. Schellhammer P. F. Radical prostatectomy. Patterns of local failure and survival in 67 patients. Urology 1988;(31):191–7.

4. Swanson G. P., Basler J. W. Prognostic factors for failure after prostatectomy. J Cancer 2011;2:1–19.

5. Суконко О. Г., Ролевич А. И., Поляков С. Л. и др. Результаты радикальной простатэктомии при локализованном и местно-распространенном раке предстательной железы. Онкол журнал 2007;(1):98–108. [Sukonko О.G., Rolevich A.I., Polyakov S.L. et al. Results of radical prostatectomyat localized and regional prostate cancer. Oncologycheskiy jurnal = Journal of Oncology 2007; (1):98–108.]

6. Stephenson A. J., Kattan M. W. Nomograms for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2006;98(1):39–46.

7. Partin A. W., Yoo J., Carter H. B. et al. The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1993; 150(1):110–4.

8. D’Amico A. V., Whittington R., Schnall M. et al. The impact of the inclusion of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging in a multivariate analisis to predict clinically unsuspected extraprostatic cancer. Cancer 1995;75:2368–72.

9. Wang L., Mullerad M., Chen H. N. et al. Prostate cancer: incremental value of endorectal MR imaging findings for prediction of extracapsular extension. Radiology 2004;232:133–9.

10. Rischke H. C., Schäfer A. O., Nestle U. et al. Detection of local recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy in terms of salvage radiotherapy using dynamic contrast enhanced-MRI without endorectal coil. Radiat Oncol 2012;7:185–93.