# Clinical Tools for Optimizing Therapeutic Decision-Making in Prostate Cancer: A Five-Year Retrospective Analysis

## TL;DR

This study shows that preoperative diagnostic scores help predict prostate cancer outcomes and improve treatment decisions after surgery.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into how preoperative scores correlate with postoperative outcomes in prostate cancer patients.

## Key findings

- Preoperative Gleason scores increased significantly in high-risk patients after surgery.
- Preoperative MRI findings correlated with postoperative pathological results in high-risk patients.
- Preoperative scores like CAPRA and PIRADS showed significant correlations with postoperative ISUP grades.

## Abstract

The effective staging of prostate cancer is essential for optimizing treatment and predicting outcomes. This study assessed the correlation between detailed preoperative diagnostic scores and postoperative outcomes to evaluate the accuracy of cancer restaging and its impact on treatment decisions and prognosis after prostatectomy. This retrospective study analyzed 133 prostate cancer patients who underwent prostatectomies at “Pius Brinzeu” Clinical Emergency Hospital in Timisoara over five years. Preoperative Gleason scores increased significantly across risk categories, from an average of 6.21 in low-risk patients to 7.57 in high-risk patients. This trend continued postoperatively, with scores rising from 7.04 to 8.33, respectively. The average increase in Gleason scores from preoperative to postoperative assessments was most pronounced in high-risk patients, at 0.76. Significant changes in clinical staging included increases in NCCN risk, where high-risk patients showed a 30% increase, and ISUP grade, with a 26.7% increase in the high-risk category. Notably, nodal status changes were also significant in high-risk patients, showing a 23.3% increase. The incidence of MRI-detected adenopathy was notably higher in the high-risk group (50%). Furthermore, there were significant correlations between the preoperative CAPRA score and postoperative ISUP grade (r = 0.261) and the preoperative PIRADS score and postoperative ISUP grade (r = 0.306). Similar observations were made between the preoperative and postoperative Gleason scores (r = 0.286) and the number of positive fragments (r = 0.227) with the postoperative ISUP grading. Furthermore, the preoperative CAPRA score was significantly correlated (r = 0.261) with the postoperative ISUP grading. Preoperative MRI findings, which included assessments of adenopathy and seminal vesicle invasion, were also significantly correlated (r = 0.218) with the postoperative pathological findings. Additionally, a significant correlation was found between the preoperative PIRADS score and postoperative ISUP grade (r = 0.306). In forecasting the aggressiveness and staging of prostate cancer following surgery, preoperative PSA levels showed an AUC of 0.631; the preoperative Gleason score had an AUC adjusted to 0.582, and the number of positive biopsy fragments indicated an AUC of 0.566. These results highlight the necessity of accurate and comprehensive preoperative assessments to better predict disease progression and refine treatment strategies.