Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022;75(1):35-40.
doi: 10.5173/ceju.2021.0217. Epub 2022 Dec 31.

Predictors of upgrading from low-grade cancer at prostatectomy in men with biparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Ola Christiansen  1   2   3 , Ola Bratt  4   5 , Øyvind Kirkevold  1   6   7 , Jūratė Šaltytė Benth  1   2   8 , Pathmakulendran Manoharan  9 , Anders Selnes  10 , Erik Skaaheim Haug  11 , Marit Slaaen  1   2
Affiliations

Predictors of upgrading from low-grade cancer at prostatectomy in men with biparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Ola Christiansen et al. Cent European J Urol. 2022.

Abstract

Introduction: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density has previously been identified as a predictor of histological upgrading at radical prostatectomy, but how information from pre-treatment biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) contributes needs further clarification. The objective of this register-based study was to identify predictors of upgrading at prostatectomy in men with Grade group (GG) 1 and pre-treatment bpMRI.

Material and methods: This single-center study included men with GG 1 cancer on prediagnostic biopsy, who underwent bpMRI and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) between March 2014 and September 2019. We estimated logistic regression models to explore predictors for upgrading. The explored potential predictors were age, PSA density, tumor stage and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score (dichotomised 1-3 versus 4-5).

Results: Upgrading was observed in 56% (73/130) of the men. PSA density was the only significant predictor for upgrading (unadjusted OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.2; 2.4 adjusted OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.2; 2.5). The probability of upgrading was lower for men with a PIRADS 1-3 than for PIRADS 4-5, but the difference was not statistically significant (adjusted OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2; 1.1, p = 0.082). Among men with PI-RADS 1-3, the probability increased with increasing PSA density (p = 0.036). With PI-RADS 4-5 the probability of upgrading was high over the entire PSA density range.

Conclusions: PSA density is a clinically important factor to predict upgrading from GG1 when bpMRI shows PI-RADS 1-3. In men with PI-RADS 4-5 on bpMRI, the probability of an undetected GG 2-5 cancer is high regardless of the PSA density.

Keywords: biparametric magnetic resonance imaging; histological upgrading; robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The association between PSA density and the probability for upgrading from biopsy GG 1 to GG 2–5 in radical prostatectomy specimens from 130 men. GG – grade group; PSA – prostate-specific antigen; PSA density – PSA divided by prostate volume
Figure 2
Figure 2
The association between PSA density and the probability of upgrading from biopsy GG 1 to GG 2–5 in the radical prostatectomy specimen stratified by PI-RADS 1–3 and PI-RADS 4–5. GG – grade group; PSA – prostate-specific antigen; PSA density – PSA divided by prostate volume; PI-RADS – Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. European Association of Urology (EAU) Prostate Cancer 2017. [Available from: http://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/
    1. Athanazio D, Gotto G, Shea-Budgell M, Yilmaz A, Trpkov K. Global Gleason grade groups in prostate cancer: concordance of biopsy and radical prostatectomy grades and predictors of upgrade and downgrade. Histopathology. 2017;70:1098–1106. - PubMed
    1. Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:244–252. - PubMed
    1. Norris JM, Carmona Echeverria LM, et al. What Type of Prostate Cancer Is Systematically Overlooked by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? An Analysis from the PROMIS Cohort. Eur Urol. 2020;78:163–170. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vellekoop A, Loeb S, Folkvaljon Y, Stattin P. Population based study of predictors of adverse pathology among candidates for active surveillance with Gleason 6 prostate cancer. J Urol. 2014;191:350–357. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources