mEPE-score: a comprehensive grading system for predicting pathologic extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer at multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Abstract Objective To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the PI-RADS v2.1 multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) features in predicting extraprostatic extension (mEPE) of prostate cancer (PCa), as well as to develop and validate a comprehensive mpMRI-derived score (mEPE-score). Methods We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients admitted to two institutions for radical prostatectomy for PCa with available records of mpMRI performed between January 2015 and December 2020. Data from one institution was used for investigating diagnostic performance of each mEPE feature using radical prostatectomy specimens as benchmark. The results were implemented in a mEPE-score as follows: no mEPE features: 1; capsular abutment: 2; irregular or spiculated margin: 3; bulging prostatic contour, or asymmetry of the neurovascular bundles, or tumor-capsule interface > 1.0 cm: 4; ≥ 2 of the previous three parameters or measurable extraprostatic disease: 5. The performance of mEPE features was evaluated using the five diagnostic parameters and ROC curve analysis. Results Two-hundred patients were enrolled at site 1 and 76 at site 2. mEPE features had poor sensitivities ranging from 0.08 (0.00–0.15) to 0.71 (0.59–0.83), whereas specificity ranged from 0.68 (0.58–0.79) to 1.00. mEPE-score showed excellent discriminating ability (AUC > 0.8) and sensitivity = 0.82 and specificity = 0.77 with a threshold of 3. mEPE-score had AUC comparable to ESUR-score ( p = 0.59 internal validation; p = 0.82 external validation), higher than or comparable to mEPE-grade ( p = 0.04 internal validation; p = 0.58 external validation), and higher than early-and-late-EPE ( p < 0.0001 internal and external validation). There were no significant differences between readers having different expertise with EPE-score ( p = 0.32) or mEPE-grade ( p = 0.45), but there were significant differences for ESUR-score ( p = 0.02) and early-versus-late-EPE ( p = 0.03). Conclusions The individual mEPE features have low sensitivity and high specificity. The use of mEPE-score allows for consistent and reliable assessment for pathologic EPE. Key Points • Individual PI-RADS v2.1 mpMRI features had poor sensitivities ranging from 0.08 (0.00–0.15) to 0.71 (0.59–0.83), whereas Sp ranged from 0.68 (0.58–0.79) to 1.00. • mEPE-score is an all-inclusive score for the assessment of pEPE with excellent discriminating ability (i.e., AUC > 0.8) and Se = 0.82, Sp = 0.77, PPV = 0.74, and NPV = 0.84 with a threshold of 3. • The diagnostic performance of the expert reader and beginner reader with pEPE-score was comparable (p = 0.32).