Table 3 Comparison between the training cohort and the validation cohort of the Candiolo nomogram
Clinical characteristics | Training cohort | Validation cohort |
|---|---|---|
Sample size | 2,493 | 561 |
Median Follow-up, mo | 50 | 50 |
Mean age, yy | 71.7 | 71.9 |
mean PSA, ng/ml | 15.0 | 12.93 |
T staging, % | ||
cT1 | 30.5% | 63% |
cT2 | 57.5% | 33% |
cT3-4 | 12% | 4% |
bGS, % | ||
≤ 6 | 48% | 39% |
3 + 4 | 22% | 31% |
4 + 3 | 11.5% | 12% |
8 | 12% | 10% |
9–10 | 6.5% | 8% |
Biopsy cores sampled, mean no | 10.3 | 11.0 |
%PC, mean % | 44.3% | 41.3% |
D’Amico risk class, % | ||
Low | 21.5% | 21% |
Intermediate | 32% | 40% |
High | 46.5% | 39% |
Candiolo risk class, % | ||
Very-low | 21% | 24% |
Low | 31% | 37% |
Intermediate | 28% | 24% |
High | 13% | 10% |
Very-high | 7% | 5% |
RT dose, ED2Gy | ||
Mean (SD) | 75.5 (3.0) | 77.7 (2.4) |
Median (min–max) | 76.0 (67.1–81.1) | 78.0 (72–82) |
Exclusive RT, % | 38% | 24% |
RT + ADT, % | 62% | 76% |