Dataset related to article "External Validation and Comparison of Two Nomograms Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement in Patients subjected to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Concomitant Lymph Node Dissection: A Single Tertiary Center Experience in the MRI-Era "

This record contains raw data related to article “External Validation and Comparison of Two Nomograms Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement in Patients subjected to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Concomitant Lymph Node Dissection: A Single Tertiary Center Experience in the MRI-Era" Abstract <strong>Introduction: </strong> To externally validate and directly compare the performance of the Briganti 2012 and Briganti 2019 nomograms as predictors of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a cohort of patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND). <strong>Materials and methods: </strong> After the exclusion of patients with incomplete biopsy, imaging, or clinical data, 752 patients who underwent RARP and ePLND between December 2014 to August 2021 at our center, were included. Among these patients, 327 (43.5%) had undergone multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) and mpMRI-targeted biopsy. The preoperative risk of LNI was calculated for all patients using the Briganti 2012 nomogram, while the Briganti 2019 nomogram was used only in patients who had performed mpMRI with the combination of targeted and systematic biopsy. The performances of Briganti 2012 and 2019 models were evaluated using the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis, calibrations plot, and decision curve analysis. <strong>Results: </strong> A median of 13 (IQR 9-18) nodes per patient was removed, and 78 (10.4%) patients had LNI at final pathology. The area under the curves (AUCs) for Briganti 2012 and 2019 were 0.84 and 0.82, respectively. The calibration plots showed a good correlation between the predicted probabilities and the observed proportion of LNI for both models, with a slight tendency to underestimation. The decision curve analysis (DCA) of the two models was similar, with a slightly higher net benefit for Briganti 2012 nomogram. In patients receiving both systematic- and targeted-biopsy, the Briganti 2012 accuracy was 0.85, and no significant difference was found between the AUCs of 2012 and 2019 nomograms (<em>p</em> = 0.296). In the sub-cohort of 518 (68.9%) intermediate-risk PCa patients, the Briganti 2012 nomogram outperforms the 2019 model in terms of accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.77), calibration curve, and net benefit at DCA. <strong>Conclusion: </strong> The direct comparison of the two nomograms showed that the most updated nomogram, which included MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy data, was not significantly more accurate than the 2012 model in the prediction of LNI, suggesting a negligible role of mpMRI in the current population.本数据集包含与论文《机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术联合扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫术患者淋巴结侵犯概率预测的两款列线图（Nomogram）的外部验证与比较：MRI时代单三级医疗中心经验》相关的原始数据。该论文摘要如下： **引言**：本研究旨在针对接受机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术（Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy, RARP）联合扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫术（extended pelvic lymph node dissection, ePLND）的患者队列，对Briganti 2012与Briganti 2019两款列线图预测淋巴结侵犯（Lymph Node Invasion, LNI）的性能开展外部验证并直接比较。 **材料与方法**：剔除活检、影像或临床资料不完整的患者后，本研究纳入2014年12月至2021年8月期间于本中心接受RARP联合ePLND的752例患者。其中327例（43.5%）患者接受了多参数磁共振成像（multi-parametric MRI, mpMRI）及mpMRI靶向活检。所有患者均采用Briganti 2012列线图计算术前LNI风险；而Briganti 2019列线图仅用于接受mpMRI联合靶向活检与系统活检的患者。采用受试者工作特征曲线（receiver-operating characteristics curve, ROC）下面积分析、校准曲线及决策曲线分析（decision curve analysis, DCA）评估Briganti 2012与2019模型的性能。 **结果**：每位患者切除淋巴结数的中位数为13枚（四分位间距9~18），78例（10.4%）患者最终病理确诊存在LNI。Briganti 2012与2019列线图的受试者工作特征曲线下面积（AUCs）分别为0.84与0.82。校准曲线显示，两款模型的预测概率与实际LNI发生率均具有良好相关性，仅存在轻微的低估倾向。两款模型的决策曲线分析（DCA）结果相似，Briganti 2012列线图的净获益略高。在同时接受系统活检与靶向活检的患者中，Briganti 2012列线图的准确率为0.85，两款列线图的AUC无显著差异（p=0.296）。在518例（68.9%）中危前列腺癌（Prostate Cancer, PCa）患者亚队列中，Briganti 2012列线图在准确率（0.82 vs 0.77）、校准曲线及决策曲线分析的净获益方面均优于2019模型。 **结论**：两款列线图的直接比较结果显示，纳入MRI及mpMRI靶向活检数据的最新款列线图，在本研究人群中预测LNI的准确性并未显著优于2012模型，提示mpMRI在当前队列中的临床价值有限。