Validation of a 22-Gene Genomic Classifier in Patients With Recurrent Prostate Cancer: An Ancillary Study of the NRG/RTOG 9601 Randomized Clinical Trial

Association Between the Decipher Genomic Classifier and Prostate Cancer Outcome in the Real-world Setting

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Although the prognostic significance of the Decipher prostate cancer genomic classifier (GC) has been established largely from analyses of archival tissue, less is known about the associations between the results of Decipher testing and oncologic outcomes among patients receiving contemporaneous testing and treatment in the real-world practice setting. Our objective was to assess the associations between the Decipher GC and risks of metastasis and biochemical recurrence (BCR) following prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) among patients tested and treated in the real-world setting.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a novel longitudinal linkage of transcriptomic data from the Decipher GC and real-world clinical data (RWD) aggregated from insurance claims, pharmacy records, and electronic health record data across payors and sites of care. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to examine the associations between the GC and study outcomes, adjusting for clinical and pathologic factors.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Metastasis from prostate cancer and BCR after radical prostatectomy, Decipher GC continuous score, and risk categories were evaluated. We identified 58 935 participants who underwent Decipher testing, including 33 379 on a biopsy specimen and 25 556 on an RP specimen. The median age was 67 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 62-72) at biopsy testing and 65 yr (IQR 59-69) at RP. The median GC score was 0.43 (IQR 0.27-0.66) among biopsy-tested patients and 0.54 (0.32-0.79) among RP-tested patients. The GC was independently associated with the risk of metastasis among biopsy-tested (hazard ratio [HR] per 0.1 unit increase in GC 1.21 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.16-1.27], p < 0.001) and RP-tested (HR 1.20 [95% CI 1.17-1.24], p < 0.001) patients after adjusting for baseline clinical and pathologic risk factors. In addition, the GC was associated with the risk of BCR among RP-tested patients (HR 1.12 [95% CI 1.10-1.14], p < 0.001) in models adjusted for age and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment postsurgical score.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

This real-world study of a novel transcriptomic linkage conducted at a national scale supports the external prognostic validity of the Decipher GC among patients managed in contemporary practice.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This study looked at the use of the Decipher genomic classifier, a test used to help understand the aggressiveness of a patient's prostate cancer. Looking at the results of 58 935 participants who underwent testing, we found that the Decipher test helped estimate the risk of cancer recurrence and metastasis.

PTEN Loss Is Associated with Adverse Outcomes in the Setting of Salvage Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

Salvage radiation therapy (SRT) is a mainstay of treatment for biochemical relapse following radical prostatectomy; however, few studies have examined genomic biomarkers in this context.

OBJECTIVE

We characterized the prognostic impact of previously identified deleterious molecular phenotypes-loss of PTEN, ERG expression, and TP53 mutation-for patients undergoing SRT.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We leveraged an institutional database of 320 SRT patients with available tissue and follow-up. Tissue microarrays were used for genetically validated immunohistochemistry assays.

INTERVENTION

All men underwent SRT with or without androgen deprivation therapy OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Univariable and multivariable Cox-proportional hazard models assessed the association of molecular phenotypes with biochemical recurrence-free (bRFS) and metastasis-free (MFS) survival after SRT.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Loss of PTEN (n = 123, 43%) and ERG expression (n = 118, 39%) were common in this cohort, while p53 overexpression (signifying TP53 missense mutation) was infrequent (n = 21, 7%). In univariable analyses, any loss of PTEN portended worse bRFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.86; 95% confidence interval 1.36-2.57) and MFS (HR 1.89; 1.21-2.94), with homogeneous PTEN loss being associated with the highest risk of MFS (HR 2.47; 1.54-3.95). Similarly, p53 overexpression predicted worse bRFS (HR 1.95; 1.14-3.32) and MFS (HR 2.79; 1.50-5.19). ERG expression was associated with worse MFS only (HR 1.6; 1.03-2.48). On the multivariable analysis adjusting for known prognostic features, homogeneous PTEN loss remained predictive of adverse bRFS (HR 1.82; 1.12-2.96) and MFS (HR 2.08; 1.06-4.86). The study is limited by its retrospective and single-institution design.

CONCLUSIONS

PTEN loss by immunohistochemistry is an independent adverse prognostic factor for bRFS and MFS in prostate cancer patients treated with SRT. Future trials will determine the optimal approach to treating SRT patients with adverse molecular prognostic features.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Loss of the PTEN tumor suppressor protein is associated with worse outcomes after salvage radiotherapy, independent of other clinical or pathologic patient characteristics.

Association of Genomic Prostate Score at positive margin with recurrence after radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the utility of the 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score® (GPS; MDxHealth, Irvine, CA, USA) performed on prostate cancer at the positive margin of the radical prostatectomy (RP) for its association with risk of subsequent biochemical recurrence (BCR).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We designed a case-cohort for the outcome of BCR, selecting 223 from a cohort of 813 RP patients treated at Johns Hopkins from 2008 to 2017 with positive margins and available clinical data; of these, 213 had available tissue and clinical data. RNA was isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour tissue adjacent to the positive surgical margin and the GPS was evaluable in 203 of these patients with a score ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating higher risk. All patients underwent RP with or without adjuvant radiation therapy (ART). The statistical analysis employed Cox proportional hazards regression models for outcome of BCR weighted for case-cohort design.

RESULTS

In univariable analysis, every 20-unit increase in the GPS was associated with a nearly threefold increase in risk of BCR (hazard ratio [HR] per 20 units 2.82, P < 0.001). In a multivariable Cox model adjusted for age, race, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical score, Grade Group at the positive margin, and ART, the GPS was significantly associated with BCR (HR 1.56 per 20 units; 95% confidence interval 1.11-2.19; P = 0.011). The study is limited by its retrospective and single institution design.

CONCLUSIONS

The GPS at the positive surgical margin could help stratify prognosis and inform clinical decision-making regarding adjuvant therapy after RP.

Biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after primary definitive therapy: treatment based on risk stratification

BACKGROUND

Nearly one-third of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) experience biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment. BCR increases the risk of distant metastasis and mortality in patients with prognostically unfavorable features. These patients are best managed with a tailored treatment strategy incorporating risk stratification using clinicopathological factors, next-generation imaging, and genomic testing.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review examines the utility of risk stratification for the management of patients with BCR in the context of clinical trial data, referencing the latest recommendations by European and US medical societies.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for relevant studies published through May 21 2023 on treatment of patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

RESULTS

European and US guidelines support the risk-stratified management of BCR. Post-RP, salvage EBRT (with or without androgen deprivation therapy [ADT]) is an accepted treatment option for patients with BCR. Post-EBRT, local salvage therapies (RP, cryotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound, stereotactic body radiotherapy, and low-dose-rate and high-dose-rate brachytherapy) have demonstrated comparable relapse-free survival rates but differing adverse event profiles, short and long term. Local salvage therapies should be used for local-only relapses while ADT should be considered for regional or distant relapses. In practice, patients often receive ADT, with varying guidance for intermittent ADT vs. continuous ADT, due to consideration of quality-of-life effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a lack of consensus for BCR treatment among guideline associations and medical societies, risk stratification of patients is essential for personalized treatment approaches, as it allows for an informed selection of therapeutic strategies and estimation of adverse events. In lower-risk disease, observation is recommended while in higher-risk disease, after failed repeat local therapy, ADT and/or clinical trial enrollment may be appropriate. Results from ongoing clinical studies of patients with BCR should provide consensus for management.

Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain.

METHODS

RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.

Risk Stratification of Patients with Recurrence After Primary Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogeneous disease state. While BCR is associated with worse oncologic outcomes, risk factors that impact outcomes can vary significantly, necessitating avenues for risk stratification. We sought to identify prognostic risk factors at the time of recurrence after primary radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, and prior to salvage treatment(s), associated with adverse oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of prospective studies in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from January 1, 2000 to October 16, 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (CRD42023466330). We reviewed the factors associated with oncologic outcomes among patients with BCR after primary definitive treatment.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 37 studies were included (total n = 10 632), 25 after prostatectomy (total n = 9010) and 12 after radiotherapy (total n = 1622). Following recurrence after prostatectomy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include higher pathologic T stage and grade group, negative surgical margins, shorter prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT), higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) prior to salvage treatment, shorter time to recurrence, the 22-gene tumor RNA signature, and recurrence location on molecular imaging. After recurrence following radiotherapy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include a shorter time to recurrence, and shorter PSADT or higher PSA velocity. Grade group, T stage, and prior short-term hormone therapy (4-6 mo) were not clearly associated with adverse outcomes, although sample size and follow-up were generally limited compared with postprostatectomy data.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

This work highlights the recommendations and level of evidence for risk stratifying patients with PCa recurrence, and can be used as a benchmark for personalizing salvage treatment based on prognostics.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We summarize the data from previously reported clinical trials on the topic of which factors predict worse cancer outcomes for patients who recur with prostate cancer after their initial treatment.

Precision medicine for prostate cancer: An international perspective

Greater personalization of cancer medicine continues to shape therapy development and patient selection accordingly. The treatment of prostate cancer has evolved considerably since the discovery of androgen deprivation therapy. The comprehensive profiling of the prostate cancer genome has mapped the targetable molecular landscape of the disease and identified opportunities for the implementation of novel and combination therapies. In this review, we provide an overview of the molecular biology of prostate cancer and tools developed to aid prognostication and prediction of therapy benefit. Modern treatment of advanced prostate cancer is reviewed as a paradigm of increasing precision-informed approach to patient care, and must be considered on a global scale with respect to the state of science and care delivery.

Prostate-Specific Antigen as an Ultrasensitive Biomarker for Patients with Early Recurrent Prostate Cancer: How Low Shall We Go? A Systematic Review

Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) needs to be monitored with ultrasensitive PSA assays (uPSAs) for oncologists to be able to start salvage radiotherapy (SRT) while PSA is <0.5 µg/L for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) relapsing after a radical prostatectomy (RP). Our systematic review (SR) aimed to summarize uPSAs for patients with localized PCa. The SR was registered as InPLASY2023110084. We searched for studies on Google Scholar, PUBMED and reference lists of reviews and studies. We only included studies on uPSAs published in English and excluded studies of women, animals, sarcoidosis and reviews. Of the 115 included studies, 39 reported PSA assay methods and 76 reported clinical findings. Of 67,479 patients, 14,965 developed PSA recurrence (PSAR) and 2663 died. Extremely low PSA nadir and early developments of PSA separated PSAR-prone from non-PSAR-prone patients (cumulative p value 3.7 × 1012). RP patients with the lowest post-surgery PSA nadir and patients who had the lowest PSA at SRT had the fewest deaths. In conclusion, PSA for patients with localized PCa in the pre-PSAR phase of PCa is strongly associated with later PSAR and survival. A rising but still exceedingly low PSA at SRT predicts a good 5-year overall survival.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 1

Purpose

Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC.

Materials and Methods

The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy.

Results

The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC.

Conclusions

CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

Dose-Intensified Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Results From the PKUFH Randomized Phase 3 Trial

PURPOSE

In the randomized, single-center, PKUFH phase 3 trial, dose-intensified (72 Gy) radiation therapy was compared with conventional (66 Gy) radiation therapy. In a previous study, we found no significant difference in biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) between the 2 cohorts at 4 years. In the current analysis, we provide 7-year outcomes.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with stage pT3-4, positive surgical margins, or a prostate-specific antigen increase ≥0.2 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either 72 Gy in 36 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions. All the patients underwent image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy. The primary endpoint was bPFS. Secondary endpoints were distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Between September 2011 and November 2016, 144 patients were enrolled with 73 and 71 in the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts, respectively. At a median follow-up of 89.5 months (range, 73-97 months), there was no difference in 7-year bPFS between the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts (70.3% vs 61.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.41-1.29; P = .274). However, in patients with a higher Gleason score (8-10), the 72-Gy cohort had statistically significant improvement in 7-year bPFS compared with the 66-Gy cohort (66.5% vs 30.2%; HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.17-0.82; P = .012). In addition, in patients with multiple positive surgical margins, the 72-Gy cohort had statistically significant improvement in 7-year bPFS compared with single positive surgical margin (82.5% vs 57.5%; HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.13-0.99; P = .037). The 7-year DMFS (88.4% vs 84.9%; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.39-2.23; P = .867), CSS (94.1% vs 95.5%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.42-3.39; P = .745), and OS (92.8% vs 94.1%; HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.51-3.24; P = .594) had no statistical differences between the 72- and 66-Gy cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The current 7-year bPFS results confirmed our previous findings that dose escalation (72 Gy) demonstrated no improvement in 7-year bPFS, DMFS, CSS, or OS compared with the 66-Gy regimen. However, patients with a higher Gleason score (8-10) or multiple positive surgical margins might benefit from the 72-Gy regimen, but this requires further prospective research.

Enhancing Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) integration in prostate cancer: Insights for Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) and brachytherapy modalities

The utilization of Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) in conjunction with Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) and Brachytherapy (BT) boost in prostate cancer treatment is a subject of ongoing debate and evolving clinical practice. While contemporary trends lean towards underutilizing ADT with these modalities, existing evidence suggests that its omission may lead to potentially inferior oncologic outcomes. Recommendations for ADT use should be patient-centric, considering individual risk profiles and comorbidities, with a focus on achieving optimal oncologic outcomes while minimizing potential side effects. Ongoing clinical trials, such as PACE-C, SPA, SHIP 0804, and SHIP 36B, are anticipated to provide valuable insights into the optimal use and duration of ADT in both SBRT and BT settings. Until new evidence emerges, it is recommended to initiate ADT for unfavorable intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy, with a minimum duration of 6 months for unfavorable intermediate-risk patients and at least 12 months for those with high-risk characteristics. The decision to incorporate ADT into these radiation therapy modalities should be individualized, acknowledging the unique needs of each patient and emphasizing a tailored approach to achieve the best possible oncologic outcomes.

Prostate tumor markers: diagnosis, prognosis and management

Prostate cancer (PCA) is the second most common type of cancer in the world. Nevertheless, diagnosis is still based on nonspecific methods, or invasive methods which makes clinical decision and diagnosis difficult, generating risk of both underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis. Given the high prevalence, morbidity and mortality of PCA, new strategies are needed for its diagnosis. A review of the literature on available biomarkers for PCA was performed, using the following terms: prostate cancer AND marker OR biomarker. The search was carried out in Pubmed, Science Direct, Web of Science and Clinical Trial. A total of 35 articles were used, and PHI (Prostate Health Index) and the 4Kscore tests were identified as the best well-established serum markers. These tests are based on the evaluation of expression levels of several molecules. For analysis of urine samples, Progensa, ExoDXProstate, and Mi Prostate Score Urine Test are available. All these tests have the potential to help diagnosis, avoiding unnecessary biopsies, but they are used only in association with digital rectal examination and PSA level data. The search for biomarkers that can help in the diagnosis and therapeutic management of PCA is still in its initial phase, requiring more efforts for an effective clinical application.

Validation of the Combined Clinical Cell-Cycle Risk Score to Prognosticate Early Prostate Cancer Metastasis From Biopsy Specimens and Comparison With Other Routinely Used Risk Classifiers

PURPOSE

We aim to independently validate the prognostic utility of the combined cell-cycle risk (CCR) multimodality threshold to estimate risk of early metastasis after definitive treatment of prostate cancer and compare this prognostic ability with other validated biomarkers.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer were enrolled into a single-institutional registry for the prospective observational cohort study. The primary end point was risk of metastasis within 3 years of diagnostic biopsy. Secondary end points included time to definitive treatment, time to subsequent therapy, and metastasis after completion of initial definitive treatment. Multivariable cause-specific Cox proportional hazards regression models were produced accounting for competing risk of death and stratified on the basis of the CCR active surveillance and multimodality (MM) thresholds. Time-dependent areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 554 men with prostate cancer and available CCR score from biopsy. The CCR score was prognostic for metastasis (hazard ratio [HR], 2.32 [95% CI, 1.17 to 4.59]; P = .02), with scores above the MM threshold having a higher risk than those below the threshold (HR, 5.44 [95% CI, 2.72 to 10.91]; P < .001). The AUC for 3-year risk of metastasis on the basis of CCR was 0.736. When men with CCR above the MM threshold received MM therapy, their 3-year risk of metastasis was significantly lower than those receiving single-modality therapy (3% v 14%). Similarly, a CCR score above the active surveillance threshold portended a faster time to first definitive treatment.

CONCLUSION

CCR outperforms other commonly used biomarkers for prediction of early metastasis. We illustrate the clinical utility of the CCR active surveillance and multimodality thresholds. Molecular genomic tests can inform patient selection and personalization of treatment for localized prostate cancer.

Docetaxel Provides Oncological Benefits in the Era of New-Generation Androgen Receptor Inhibitors - or Is Three a Crowd?

In recent years, several systemic therapies have been introduced for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, including androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with docetaxel (Doc) and/or new-generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI). Trials evaluating ADT + ARSI have consistently demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit for doublet therapy over ADT alone. Similarly, the STOPCaP meta-analysis showed an OS benefit in favor of ADT + Doc versus ADT alone. ARSI, Doc, and ADT have different antitumor mechanisms, thus potentiating the effect of combination therapy. Two randomized trials showed that the addition of ARSI to ADT + Doc improves OS, especially for synchronous high-volume disease. However, the real question about triplet therapy remains unanswered: whether combining Doc with ARSI improves outcomes compared to ADT + ARSI. As there are no head-to-head comparisons, this narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding triplet therapy versus doublet therapy including ADT+ ARSI.

The Impact of Positron Emission Tomography Imaging and Tumor Molecular Profiling on Risk Stratification, Treatment Choice, and Oncological Outcomes of Patients with Primary or Relapsed Prostate Cancer: An International Collaborative Review of the Existing Literature

CONTEXT

The clinical introduction of next-generation imaging methods and molecular biomarkers ("radiogenomics") has revolutionized the field of prostate cancer (PCa). While the clinical validity of these tests has thoroughly been vetted, their clinical utility remains a matter of investigation.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the evidence to date on the impact of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and tissue-based prognostic biomarkers, including Decipher, Prolaris, and Oncotype Dx, on the risk stratification, treatment choice, and oncological outcomes of men with newly diagnosed PCa or those with biochemical failure (BCF).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a quantitative systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases (2010-2022) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement guidelines. The validated Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 scoring system was used to assess the risk of bias.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 148 studies (130 on PET and 18 on biomarkers) were included. In the primary PCa setting, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET imaging was not useful in improving T staging, moderately useful in improving N staging, but consistently useful in improving M staging in patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) unfavorable intermediate- to very-high-risk PCa. Its use led to a management change in 20-30% of patients. However, the effect of these treatment changes on survival outcomes was not clear. Similarly, biomarkers in the pretherapy primary PCa setting increased and decreased the risk, respectively, in 7-30% and 32-36% of NCCN low-risk and 31-65% and 4-15% of NCCN favorable intermediate-risk patients being considered for active surveillance. A change in management was noted in up to 65% of patients, with the change being in line with the molecular risk-based reclassification, but again, the impact of these changes on survival outcomes remained unclear. Notably, in the postsurgical primary PCa setting, biomarker-guided adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) was associated with improved oncological control: Δ↓ 2-yr BCF by 22% (level 2b). In the BCF setting, the data were more mature. PSMA PET was consistently useful in improving disease localization-Δ↑ detection for T, N, and M staging was 13-32%, 19-58%, and 9-29%, respectively. Between 29% and 73% of patients had a change in management. Most importantly, these management changes were associated with improved survival outcomes in three trials: Δ↑ 4-yr disease-free survival by 24.3%, Δ↑ 6-mo metastasis-free survival (MFS) by 46.7%, and Δ↑ androgen deprivation therapy-free survival by 8 mo in patients who received PET-concordant RT (level 1b-2b). Biomarker testing in these patients also appeared to be helpful in risk stratifying and guiding the use of early salvage RT (sRT) and concomitant hormonal therapy. Patients with high-genomic-risk scores benefitted from treatment intensification: Δ↑ 8-yr MFS by 20% with the use of early sRT and Δ↑ 12-yr MFS by 11.2% with the use of hormonal therapy alongside early sRT, while low-genomic-risk score patients did equally well with initial conservative management (level 3).

CONCLUSIONS

Both PSMA PET imaging and tumor molecular profiling provide actionable information in the management of men with primary PCa and those with BCF. Emerging data suggest that radiogenomics-guided treatments translate into direct survival benefits for patients, however, additional prospective data are awaited.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this review, we evaluated the utility of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and tumor molecular profiling in guiding the care of men with prostate cancer (PCa). We found that these tests augmented risk stratification, altered management, and improved cancer control in men with a new diagnosis of PCa or for those experiencing a relapse.

External Validation of a Digital Pathology-based Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Architecture in the NRG/RTOG 9902 Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND

Accurate risk stratification is critical to guide management decisions in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previously, we had developed and validated a multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) model generated from digital histopathology and clinical features. Here, we externally validate this model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial.

OBJECTIVE

To externally validate the MMAI model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Our validation cohort included 318 localized high-risk PCa patients from NRG/RTOG 9902 with available histopathology (337 [85%] of the 397 patients enrolled into the trial had available slides, of which 19 [5.6%] failed due to poor image quality).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Two previously locked prognostic MMAI models were validated for their intended endpoint: distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM). Individual clinical factors and the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk features served as comparators. Subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was reported per standard deviation increase of the score with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using Fine-Gray or Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The DM and PCSM MMAI algorithms were significantly and independently associated with the risk of DM (sHR [95% CI] = 2.33 [1.60-3.38], p < 0.001) and PCSM, respectively (sHR [95% CI] = 3.54 [2.38-5.28], p < 0.001) when compared against other prognostic clinical factors and NCCN high-risk features. The lower 75% of patients by DM MMAI had estimated 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 4% and 7%, and the highest quartile had average 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 19% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for the PCSM MMAI algorithm.

CONCLUSIONS

We externally validated the prognostic ability of MMAI models previously developed among men with localized high-risk disease. MMAI prognostic models further risk stratify beyond the clinical and pathological variables for DM and PCSM in a population of men already at a high risk for disease progression. This study provides evidence for consistent validation of our deep learning MMAI models to improve prognostication and enable more informed decision-making for patient care.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This paper presents a novel approach using images from pathology slides along with clinical variables to validate artificial intelligence (computer-generated) prognostic models. When implemented, clinicians can offer a more personalized and tailored prognostic discussion for men with localized prostate cancer.

Molecular Mechanisms of Prostate Cancer Development in the Precision Medicine Era: A Comprehensive Review

The progression of prostate cancer (PCa) relies on the activation of the androgen receptor (AR) by androgens. Despite efforts to block this pathway through androgen deprivation therapy, resistance can occur through several mechanisms, including the abnormal activation of AR, resulting in castration-resistant PCa following the introduction of treatment. Mutations, amplifications, and splicing variants in AR-related genes have garnered attention in this regard. Furthermore, recent large-scale next-generation sequencing analysis has revealed the critical roles of AR and AR-related genes, as well as the DNA repair, PI3K, and cell cycle pathways, in the onset and progression of PCa. Moreover, research on epigenomics and microRNA has increasingly become popular; however, it has not translated into the development of effective therapeutic strategies. Additionally, treatments targeting homologous recombination repair mutations and the PI3K/Akt pathway have been developed and are increasingly accessible, and multiple clinical trials have investigated the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors. In this comprehensive review, we outline the status of PCa research in genomics and briefly explore potential future developments in the field of epigenetic modifications and microRNAs.

How to Integrate Prostate Cancer Biomarkers in Urology Clinical Practice: An Update

Nowadays, the management of prostate cancer has become more and more challenging due to the increasing number of available treatment options, therapeutic agents, and our understanding of its carcinogenesis and disease progression. Moreover, currently available risk stratification systems used to facilitate clinical decision-making have limitations, particularly in providing a personalized and patient-centered management strategy. Although prognosis and prostate cancer-specific survival have improved in recent years, the heterogenous behavior of the disease among patients included in the same risk prognostic group negatively impacts not only our clinical decision-making but also oncological outcomes, irrespective of the treatment strategy. Several biomarkers, along with available tests, have been developed to help clinicians in difficult decision-making scenarios and guide management strategies. In this review article, we focus on the scientific evidence that supports the clinical use of several biomarkers considered by professional urological societies (and included in uro-oncological guidelines) in the diagnosis process and specific difficult management strategies for clinically localized or advanced prostate cancer.

Genomic classifiers and prognosis of localized prostate cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Refinement of the risk classification for localized prostate cancer is warranted to aid in clinical decision making. A systematic analysis was undertaken to evaluate the prognostic ability of three genomic classifiers, Decipher, GPS, and Prolaris, for biochemical recurrence, development of metastases and prostate cancer-specific mortality in patients with localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were queried for reports published from January 2010 to April 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

prospective or retrospective studies reporting prognosis for patients with localized prostate cancer.

DATA EXTRACTION

relevant data were extracted into a customized database by one researcher with a second overreading. Risk of bias was assessed using a validated tool for prognostic studies, Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS). Disagreements were resolved by consensus or by input from a third reviewer. We assessed the certainty of evidence by GRADE incorporating adaptation for prognostic studies.

RESULTS

Data synthesis: a total of 39 studies (37 retrospective) involving over 10,000 patients were identified. Twenty-two assessed Decipher, 5 GPS, and 14 Prolaris. Thirty-four studies included patients who underwent prostatectomy. Based on very low to low certainty of evidence, each of the three genomic classifiers modestly improved upon the prognostic ability for biochemical recurrence, development of metastases, and prostate cancer-specific mortality compared to standard clinical risk-classification schemes.

LIMITATIONS

downgrading of confidence in the evidence stemmed largely from bias due to the retrospective nature of the studies, heterogeneity in treatment received, and era in which patients were treated (i.e., prior to the 2000s).

CONCLUSIONS

Genomic classifiers provide a small but consistent improvement upon the prognostic ability of clinical classification schemes, which may be helpful when treatment decisions are uncertain. However, evidence from current management-era data and of the predictive ability of these tests is needed.

Novel hormone therapy and coordination of care in high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer

Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurs in 20-50% of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing primary definitive treatment. Patients with high-risk BCR have an increased risk of metastatic progression and subsequent PCa-specific mortality, and thus could benefit from treatment intensification. Given the increasing complexity of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, multidisciplinary care (MDC) can play a crucial role in the individualized management of this patient population. This review explores the role for MDC when evaluating the clinical evidence for the evolving definition of high-risk BCR and the emerging therapeutic strategies, especially with novel hormone therapies (NHTs), for patients with either high-risk BCR or oligometastatic PCa. Clinical studies have used different characteristics to define high-risk BCR and there is no consensus regarding the definition of high-risk BCR nor for management strategies. Next-generation imaging and multigene panels offer potential enhanced patient identification and precision-based decision-making, respectively. Treatment intensification with NHTs, either alone or combined with radiotherapy or metastasis-directed therapy, has been promising in clinical trials in patients with high-risk BCR or oligometastases. As novel risk-stratification and treatment options as well as evidence-based literature evolve, it is important to involve a multidisciplinary team to identify patients with high-risk features at an earlier stage, and make informed decisions on the treatments that could optimize their care and long-term outcomes. Nevertheless, MDC data are scarce in the BCR or oligometastatic setting. Efforts to integrate MDC into the standard management of this patient population are needed, and will likely improve outcomes across this heterogeneous PCa patient population.

Managing postoperative biochemical relapse in prostate cancer, from the perspective of the Francophone group of Urological radiotherapy (GFRU)

Up to 50% of patients treated with radical surgery for localized prostate cancer may experience biochemical recurrence that requires appropriate management. Definitions of biochemical relapse may vary, but, in all cases, consist of an increase in a PSA without clinical or radiological signs of disease. Molecular imaging through to positron emission tomography has taken a preponderant place in relapse diagnosis, progressively replacing bone scan and CT-scan. Prostate bed radiotherapy is currently a key treatment, the action of which should be potentiated by androgen deprivation therapy. Nowadays perspectives consist in determining the best combination therapies, particularly thanks to next-generation hormone therapies, but not exclusively. Several trials are ongoing and should address these issues. We present here a literature review aiming to discuss the current management of biochemical relapse in prostate cancer after radical surgery, in lights of recent findings, as well as future perspectives.

Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer: From Diagnosis to Treatment

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a widespread malignancy with global significance, which substantially affects cancer-related mortality. Its spectrum varies widely, from slow-progressing cases to aggressive or even lethal forms. Effective patient stratification into risk groups is crucial to therapeutic decisions and clinical trials. This review examines a wide range of diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, several of which are integrated into clinical guidelines, such as the PHI, the 4K score, PCA3, Decipher, and Prolaris. It also explores the emergence of novel biomarkers supported by robust preclinical evidence, including urinary miRNAs and isoprostanes. Genetic alterations frequently identified in PCa, including BRCA1/BRCA2, ETS gene fusions, and AR changes, are also discussed, offering insights into risk assessment and precision treatment strategies. By evaluating the latest developments and applications of PCa biomarkers, this review contributes to an enhanced understanding of their role in disease management.

Genomic Classifier Performance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 Randomized Phase 3 Trial

PURPOSE

Intermediate-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state with diverse treatment options. The 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (GC) retrospectively has shown to improve risk stratification in these patients. We assessed the performance of the GC in men with intermediate-risk disease enrolled in NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26 with updated follow-up.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

After National Cancer Institute approval, biopsy slides were collected from NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26, a randomized phase 3 trial of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer randomized to 70.2 Gy versus 79.2 Gy of radiation therapy without androgen deprivation therapy. RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor foci to generate the locked 22-gene GC model. The primary endpoint for this ancillary project was disease progression (composite of biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and use of salvage therapy). Individual endpoints were also assessed. Fine-Gray or cause-specific Cox multivariable models were constructed adjusting for randomization arm and trial stratification factors.

RESULTS

Two-hundred fifteen patient samples passed quality control for analysis. The median follow-up was 12.8 years (range, 2.4-17.7). On multivariable analysis, the 22-gene GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently prognostic for disease progression (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.26; P = .04), biochemical failure (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.37; P < .001), distant metastasis (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.55; P = .01), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (sHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.76; P < .001). Ten-year distant metastasis in GC low-risk patients was 4% compared with 16% for GC high-risk patients. In patients with lower GC scores, the 10-year difference in metastasis-free survival rate between arms was -7%, compared with 21% for higher GC patients (P-interaction = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first validation of a biopsy-based gene expression classifier, assessing both its prognostic and predictive value, using data from a randomized phase 3 trial of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Decipher improves risk stratification and can aid in treatment decision-making in men with intermediate-risk disease.

Racial disparity in the genomics of precision oncology of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Significant racial disparities in prostate cancer incidence and mortality have been reported between African American Men (AAM), who are at increased risk for prostate cancer, and European American Men (EAM). In most of the studies carried out on prostate cancer, this population is underrepresented. With the advancement of genome-wide association studies, several genetic predictor models of prostate cancer risk have been elaborated, as well as numerous studies that identify both germline and somatic mutations with clinical utility.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite significant advances, the AAM population continues to be underrepresented in genomic studies, which can limit generalizability and potentially widen disparities. Here we outline racial disparities in currently available genomic applications that are used to estimate the risk of individuals developing prostate cancer and to identify personalized oncology treatment strategies. While the incidence and mortality of prostate cancer are different between AAM and EAM, samples from AAM remain to be unrepresented in different studies.

CONCLUSION

This disparity impacts the available genomic data on prostate cancer. As a result, the disparity can limit the predictive utility of the genomic applications and may lead to the widening of the existing disparities. More studies with substantially higher recruitment and engagement of African American patients are necessary to overcome this disparity.

Contemporary Evaluation of Salvage Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Radiotherapy Dose, Field Size, and Use of Hormone Therapy

Studies have provided high-level evidence on various aspects of salvage radiation therapy (SRT) for recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy, including field design, dose and fractionation, and additional hormonal therapy regimens. For patients with higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at SRT, addition of hormonal therapy and pelvic nodal radiation will improve PSA-based endpoints. By contrast, dose escalation is not supported by level 1 evidence in this setting.

Use of the Decipher genomic classifier among men with prostate cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND

Management of localized or recurrent prostate cancer since the 1990s has been based on risk stratification using clinicopathological variables, including Gleason score, T stage (based on digital rectal exam), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). In this study a novel prognostic test, the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC), was used to stratify risk of prostate cancer progression in a US national database of men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

Records of prostate cancer cases from participating SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program registries, diagnosed during the period from 2010 through 2018, were linked to records of testing with the GC prognostic test. Multivariable analysis was used to quantify the association between GC scores or risk groups and use of definitive local therapy after diagnosis in the GC biopsy-tested cohort and postoperative radiotherapy in the GC-tested cohort as well as adverse pathological findings after prostatectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 572 545 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 8927 patients underwent GC testing. GC biopsy-tested patients were more likely to undergo active active surveillance or watchful waiting than untested patients (odds ratio [OR] =2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04 to 2.38, P < .001). The highest use of active surveillance or watchful waiting was for patients with a low-risk GC classification (41%) compared with those with an intermediate- (27%) or high-risk (11%) GC classification (P < .001). Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network patients with low and favorable-intermediate risk, higher GC risk class was associated with greater use of local therapy (OR = 4.79, 95% CI = 3.51 to 6.55, P < .001). Within this subset of patients who were subsequently treated with prostatectomy, high GC risk was associated with harboring adverse pathological findings (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.38 to 6.27, P = .005). Use of radiation after prostatectomy was statistically significantly associated with higher GC risk groups (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.89 to 3.84).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a strong association between use of the biopsy GC test and likelihood of conservative management. Higher genomic classifier scores are associated with higher rates of adverse pathology at time of surgery and greater use of postoperative radiotherapy.In this study the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC) was used to analyze a US national database of men with prostate cancer. Use of the GC was associated with conservative management (ie, active surveillance). Among men who had high-risk GC scores and then had surgery, there was a 3-fold higher chance of having worrisome findings in surgical specimens.

Randomized phase II trial of MRI-guided salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer in 4 weeks versus 2 weeks (SHORTER)

BACKGROUND

Ultra-hypofractionated image-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is increasingly used for definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) facilitates improved visualization, real-time tracking of targets and/or organs-at-risk (OAR), and capacity for adaptive planning which may translate to improved targeting and reduced toxicity to surrounding tissues. Given promising results from NRG-GU003 comparing conventional and moderate hypofractionation in the post-operative setting, there is growing interest in exploring ultra-hypofractionated post-operative regimens. It remains unclear whether this can be done safely and whether MRgRT may help mitigate potential toxicity. SHORTER (NCT04422132) is a phase II randomized trial prospectively evaluating whether salvage MRgRT delivered in 5 fractions versus 20 fractions is non-inferior with respect to gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities at 2-years post-treatment.

METHODS

A total of 136 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to salvage MRgRT in 5 fractions or 20 fractions using permuted block randomization. Patients will be stratified according to baseline Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) bowel and urinary domain scores as well as nodal treatment and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Patients undergoing 5 fractions will receive a total of 32.5 Gy over 2 weeks and patients undergoing 20 fractions will receive a total of 55 Gy over 4 weeks, with or without nodal coverage (25.5 Gy over 2 weeks and 42 Gy over 4 weeks) and ADT as per the investigator's discretion. The co-primary endpoints are change scores in the bowel and the urinary domains of the EPIC. The change scores will reflect the 2-year score minus the pre-treatment (baseline) score. The secondary endpoints include safety endpoints, including change in GI and GU symptoms at 3, 6, 12 and 60 months from completion of treatment, and efficacy endpoints, including time to progression, prostate cancer specific survival and overall survival.

DISCUSSION

The SHORTER trial is the first randomized phase II trial comparing toxicity of ultra-hypofractionated and hypofractionated MRgRT in the salvage setting. The primary hypothesis is that salvage MRgRT delivered in 5 fractions will not significantly increase GI and GU toxicities when compared to salvage MRgRT delivered in 20 fractions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04422132. Date of registration: June 9, 2020.

Can We Predict Prostate Cancer Metastasis Based on Biomarkers? Where Are We Now?

The incidence of prostate cancer (PC) has risen annually. PC mortality is explained by the metastatic disease (mPC). There is an intermediate scenario in which patients have non-mPC but have initiated a metastatic cascade through epithelial-mesenchymal transition. There is indeed a need for more and better tools to predict which patients will progress in the future to non-localized clinical disease or already have micrometastatic disease and, therefore, will clinically progress after primary treatment. Biomarkers for the prediction of mPC are still under development; there are few studies and not much evidence of their usefulness. This review is focused on tissue-based genomic biomarkers (TBGB) for the prediction of metastatic disease. We develop four main research questions that we attempt to answer according to the current evidence. Why is it important to predict metastatic disease? Which tests are available to predict metastatic disease? What impact should there be on clinical guidelines and clinical practice in predicting metastatic disease? What are the current prostate cancer treatments? The importance of predicting metastasis is fundamental given that, once metastasis is diagnosed, quality of life (QoL) and survival drop dramatically. There is still a need and space for more cost-effective TBGB tests that predict mPC disease.

Transcriptomic Signatures Associated With Outcomes in Recurrent Prostate Cancer Treated With Salvage Radiation, Androgen-Deprivation Therapy, and Enzalutamide: Correlative Analysis of the STREAM Trial

PURPOSE

Men with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy (RP) may progress despite radiation and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT). Tissue-based transcriptomic signatures can identify who may benefit from a more aggressive systemic approach.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective phase II multicenter trial of enzalutamide, ADT, and salvage radiotherapy in men with rising PSA after RP. Tumor tissue was analyzed using the Decipher platform for gene expression, including a novel prostate subtyping classifier, PTEN loss, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), and ADT response. Cox models were used to associate signature scores with progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Of the 38 men enrolled, 31 had tissue with sufficient-quality RNA for genomic analysis. Luminal differentiated (LD) subtype tumors had the longest 3-year PFS at 89% compared with 19% in the luminal proliferating subtype. Men with signatures of PTEN loss (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.64; P = .01) or HRD (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.39; P = .009) had worse PFS, while those with higher ADT response signature scores (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.94; P = .01) were associated with improved PFS. Analysis of these signatures in a large cohort (n = 5,330) of RP samples from patients with biochemical recurrence found that these signatures provide complementary information related to outcomes with salvage radiation.

CONCLUSION

Despite aggressive systemic therapy with salvage radiation, nearly 50% of high-risk men relapse within 3 years. We show that LD and higher ADT sensitivity tumors had favorable outcomes. Those with a luminal proliferating subtype, PTEN loss, and/or HRD signatures had poor outcomes despite ADT/radiation and enzalutamide and may benefit from alternative approaches.

Histology Specific Molecular Biomarkers: Ushering in a New Era of Precision Radiation Oncology

Histopathology and clinical staging have historically formed the backbone for allocation of treatment decisions in oncology. Although this has provided an extremely practical and fruitful approach for decades, it has long been evident that these data alone do not adequately capture the heterogeneity and breadth of disease trajectories experienced by patients. As efficient and affordable DNA and RNA sequencing have become available, the ability to provide precision therapy has become within grasp. This has been realized with systemic oncologic therapy, as targeted therapies have demonstrated immense promise for subsets of patients with oncogene-driver mutations. Further, several studies have evaluated predictive biomarkers for response to systemic therapy within a variety of malignancies. Within radiation oncology, the use of genomics/transcriptomics to guide the use, dose, and fractionation of radiation therapy is rapidly evolving but still in its infancy. The genomic adjusted radiation dose/radiation sensitivity index is one such early and exciting effort to provide genomically guided radiation dosing with a pan-cancer approach. In addition to this broad method, a histology specific approach to precision radiation therapy is also underway. Herein we review select literature surrounding the use of histology specific, molecular biomarkers to allow for precision radiotherapy with the greatest emphasis on commercially available and prospectively validated biomarkers.

Towards Data Driven RT Prescription: Integrating Genomics into RT Clinical Practice

The genomic era has significantly changed the practice of clinical oncology. The use of genomic-based molecular diagnostics including prognostic genomic signatures and new-generation sequencing has become routine for clinical decisions regarding cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted agents and immunotherapy. In contrast, clinical decisions regarding radiation therapy (RT) remain uninformed about the genomic heterogeneity of tumors. In this review, we discuss the clinical opportunity to utilize genomics to optimize RT dose. Although from the technical perspective, RT has been moving towards a data-driven approach, RT prescription dose is still based on a one-size-fits all approach, with most RT dose based on cancer diagnosis and stage. This approach is in direct conflict with the realization that tumors are biologically heterogeneous, and that cancer is not a single disease. Here, we discuss how genomics can be integrated into RT prescription dose, the clinical potential for this approach and how genomic-optimization of RT dose could lead to new understanding of the clinical benefit of RT.

Analysis of a Biopsy-Based Genomic Classifier in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of the NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9202, 9413, and 9902 Phase 3 Randomized Trials

PURPOSE

Decipher is a genomic classifier (GC) prospectively validated postprostatectomy. We validated the performance of the GC in pretreatment biopsy samples within the context of 3 randomized phase 3 high-risk definitive radiation therapy trials.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A prespecified analysis plan (NRG-GU-TS006) was approved to obtain formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue from biopsy specimens from the NRG biobank from patients enrolled in the NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9202, 9413, and 9902 phase 3 randomized trials. After central review, the highest-grade tumors were profiled on clinical-grade whole-transcriptome arrays and GC scores were obtained. The primary objective was to validate the independent prognostic ability for the GC for distant metastases (DM), and secondary for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) with Cox univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

GC scores were obtained on 385 samples, of which 265 passed microarray quality control (69%) and had a median follow-up of 11 years (interquartile range, 9-13). In the pooled cohort, on univariable analysis, the GC was shown to be a prognostic factor for DM (per 0.1 unit; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-1.41; P < .001), PCSM (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.41; P < .001), and OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22; P < .001). On multivariable analyses, the GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently associated with DM (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09-1.36), PCSM (sHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.39), and OS (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) after adjusting for age, Prostate Specific Antigen, Gleason score, cT stage, trial, and randomized treatment arm. GC had similar prognostic ability in patients receiving short-term or long-term androgen-deprivation therapy, but the absolute improvement in outcome varied by GC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first validation of a gene expression biomarker on pretreatment prostate cancer biopsy samples from prospective randomized trials and demonstrates an independent association of GC score with DM, PCSM, and OS. High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state, and GC can improve risk stratification to help personalize shared decision making.

Dose-Escalated Radiotherapy Alone or in Combination With Short-Term Androgen Deprivation for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results of a Phase III Multi-Institutional Trial

PURPOSE

It remains unknown whether or not short-term androgen deprivation (STAD) improves survival among men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC) treated with dose-escalated radiotherapy (RT).

METHODS

The NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0815 study randomly assigned 1,492 patients with stage T2b-T2c, Gleason score 7, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value >10 and ≤20 ng/mL to dose-escalated RT alone (arm 1) or with STAD (arm 2). STAD was 6 months of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist therapy plus antiandrogen. RT modalities were external-beam RT alone to 79.2 Gy or external beam (45 Gy) with brachytherapy boost. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), non-PCSM, distant metastases (DMs), PSA failure, and rates of salvage therapy.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 6.3 years. Two hundred nineteen deaths occurred, 119 in arm 1 and 100 in arm 2. Five-year OS estimates were 90% versus 91%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.11]; P = .22). STAD resulted in reduced PSA failure (HR, 0.52; P <.001), DM (HR, 0.25; P <.001), PCSM (HR, 0.10; P = .007), and salvage therapy use (HR, 0.62; P = .025). Other-cause deaths were not significantly different (P = .56). Acute grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 2% of patients in arm 1 and in 12% for arm 2 (P <.001). Cumulative incidence of late grade ≥3 AEs was 14% in arm 1 and 15% in arm 2 (P = .29).

CONCLUSION

STAD did not improve OS rates for men with IRPC treated with dose-escalated RT. Improvements in metastases rates, prostate cancer deaths, and PSA failures should be weighed against the risk of adverse events and the impact of STAD on quality of life.

Crafting a Personalized Prognostic Model for Malignant Prostate Cancer Patients Using Risk Gene Signatures Discovered through TCGA-PRAD Mining, Machine Learning, and Single-Cell RNA-Sequencing

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is a significant clinical issue, particularly for high Gleason score (GS) malignancy patients. Our study aimed to engineer and validate a risk model based on the profiles of high-GS PCa patients for early identification and the prediction of prognosis.

METHODS

We conducted differential gene expression analysis on patient samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and enriched our understanding of gene functions. Using the least absolute selection and shrinkage operator (LASSO) regression, we established a risk model and validated it using an independent dataset from the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC). Clinical variables were incorporated into a nomogram to predict overall survival (OS), and machine learning was used to explore the risk factor characteristics' impact on PCa prognosis. Our prognostic model was confirmed using various databases, including single-cell RNA-sequencing datasets (scRNA-seq), the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE), PCa cell lines, and tumor tissues.

RESULTS

We identified 83 differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Furthermore, WASIR1, KRTAP5-1, TLX1, KIF4A, and IQGAP3 were determined to be significant risk factors for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Based on these five risk factors, we developed a risk model and nomogram for predicting OS and PFS, with a C-index of 0.823 (95% CI, 0.766-0.881) and a 10-year area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.788 (95% CI, 0.633-0.943). Additionally, the 3-year AUC was 0.759 when validating using ICGC. KRTAP5-1 and WASIR1 were found to be the most influential prognosis factors when using the optimized machine learning model. Finally, the established model was interrelated with immune cell infiltration, and the signals were found to be differentially expressed in PCa cells when using scRNA-seq datasets and tissues.

CONCLUSIONS

We engineered an original and novel prognostic model based on five gene signatures through TCGA and machine learning, providing new insights into the risk of scarification and survival prediction for PCa patients in clinical practice.

Radiogenomic profiling of prostate tumors prior to external beam radiotherapy converges on a transcriptomic signature of TGF-β activity driving tumor recurrence

Background

Patients with localized prostate cancer have historically been assigned to clinical risk groups based on local disease extent, serum prostate specific antigen (PSA), and tumor grade. Clinical risk grouping is used to determine the intensity of treatment with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), yet a substantial proportion of patients with intermediate and high risk localized prostate cancer will develop biochemical recurrence (BCR) and require salvage therapy. Prospective identification of patients destined to experience BCR would allow treatment intensification or selection of alternative therapeutic strategies.

Methods

Twenty-nine individuals with intermediate or high risk prostate cancer were prospectively recruited to a clinical trial designed to profile the molecular and imaging features of prostate cancer in patients undergoing EBRT and ADT. Whole transcriptome cDNA microarray and whole exome sequencing were performed on pretreatment targeted biopsy of prostate tumors (n=60). All patients underwent pretreatment and 6-month post EBRT multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), and were followed with serial PSA to assess presence or absence of BCR. Genes differentially expressed in the tumor of patients with and without BCR were investigated using pathways analysis tools and were similarly explored in alternative datasets. Differential gene expression and predicted pathway activation were evaluated in relation to tumor response on mpMRI and tumor genomic profile. A novel TGF-β gene signature was developed in the discovery dataset and applied to a validation dataset.

Findings

Baseline MRI lesion volume and PTEN/TP53 status in prostate tumor biopsies correlated with the activation state of TGF-β signaling measured using pathway analysis. All three measures correlated with the risk of BCR after definitive RT. A prostate cancer-specific TGF-β signature discriminated between patients that experienced BCR vs. those that did not. The signature retained prognostic utility in an independent cohort.

Interpretation

TGF-β activity is a dominant feature of intermediate-to-unfavorable risk prostate tumors prone to biochemical failure after EBRT with ADT. TGF-β activity may serve as a prognostic biomarker independent of existing risk factors and clinical decision-making criteria.

Funding

This research was supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation, the Department of Defense Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program, National Cancer Institute, and the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research.

Genetic and Genomic Testing for Prostate Cancer: Beyond DNA Repair

Significant progress has been made in genetic and genomic testing for prostate cancer across the disease spectrum. Molecular profiling is increasingly relevant for routine clinical management, fueled in part by advancements in testing technology and integration of biomarkers into clinical trials. In metastatic prostate cancer, defects in DNA damage response genes are now established predictors of benefit to US Food and Drug Administration-approved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, and trials are actively investigating these and other targeted treatment strategies in earlier disease states. Excitingly, opportunities for molecularly informed management beyond DNA damage response genes are also maturing. Germline genetic variants (eg, BRCA2 or MSH2/6) and polygenic germline risk scores are being investigated to inform cancer screening and active surveillance in at-risk carriers. RNA expression tests have recently gained traction in localized prostate cancer, enabling patient risk stratification and tailored treatment intensification via radiotherapy and/or androgen deprivation therapy for localized or salvage treatment. Finally, emerging minimally invasive circulating tumor DNA technology promises to enhance biomarker testing in advanced disease pending additional methodological and clinical validation. Collectively, genetic and genomic tests are rapidly becoming indispensable tools for informing the optimal clinical management of prostate cancer.

Consensus Quality Measures and Dose Constraints for Prostate Cancer From the Veterans Affairs Radiation Oncology Quality Surveillance Program and American Society for Radiation Oncology Expert Panel

PURPOSE

There are no agreed upon measures to comprehensively determine the quality of radiation oncology (RO) care delivered for prostate cancer. Consequently, it is difficult to assess the implementation of scientific advances and adherence to best practices in routine clinical practice. To address this need, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Radiation Oncology Program established the VA Radiation Oncology Quality Surveillance (VA ROQS) Program to develop clinical quality measures to assess the quality of RO care delivered to Veterans with cancer. This article reports the prostate cancer consensus measures.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The VA ROQS Program contracted with the American Society for Radiation Oncology to commission a Blue Ribbon Panel of prostate cancer experts to develop a set of evidence-based measures and performance expectations. From February to June 2021, the panel developed quality, aspirational, and surveillance measures for (1) initial consultation and workup, (2) simulation, treatment planning, and delivery, and (3) follow-up. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) constraints to be used as quality measures for definitive and post-prostatectomy radiation therapy were selected. The panel also identified the optimal Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (CTCAE V5.0), toxicity terms to assess in follow-up.

RESULTS

Eighteen prostate-specific measures were developed (13 quality, 2 aspirational, and 3 surveillance). DVH metrics tailored to conventional, moderately hypofractionated, and ultrahypofractionated regimens were identified. Decision trees to determine performance for each measure were developed. Eighteen CTCAE V5.0 terms were selected in the sexual, urinary, and gastrointestinal domains as highest priority for assessment during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This set of measures and DVH constraints serves as a tool for assessing the comprehensive quality of RO care for prostate cancer. These measures will be used for ongoing quality surveillance and improvement among veterans receiving care across VA and community sites. These measures can also be applied to clinical settings outside of those serving veterans.

Utilizing clinical, pathological and radiological information to guide postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

A detectable and rising PSA following radical prostatectomy is indicative of recurrent prostate cancer. Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) with/without androgen deprivation therapy represents the main treatment option for these patients and has been historically associated with a biochemical control rate of ~70%. To determine the optimal timing, diagnostic workup, radiotherapy dosefractionation, treatment volume, and use of systemic therapy, several informative studies have been conducted in the last decade.

AREAS COVERED

This review examines the recent evidence to guide radiotherapy decision making in the SRT setting. Key topics include adjuvant vs salvage RT, utilization of molecular imaging and genomic classifiers, length of androgen deprivation therapy, inclusion of elective pelvic volume, and emerging role for hypofractionation.

EXPERT OPINION

Recently reported trials, conducted in an era prior to the routine use of molecular imaging and genomic classifiers, have been pivotal in establishing the current standard of care for SRT in prostate cancer. However, decisions about radiation treatment and systemic therapy may be tailored based on available prognostic and predictive biomarkers. Data from contemporary clinical trials are awaited to define and establish individualized, biomarker-driven approaches for SRT.

Radiation therapy post radical prostatectomy: who, when and why?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

During decades, adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) has been the standard of care after surgery, based on four randomized clinical trials (RCTs). As early salvage radiotherapy (SRT) recently challenged the ART paradigm, the optimal timing to initiate radiotherapy remains a matter of debate.

RECENT FINDINGS

Three RCTs evaluated ART or SRT for postprostatectomy patients, with pathological risk factors (Gleason score > 8, pT3, positive margins). The ARTISTIC meta-analysis demonstrated similar 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival for ART and SRT (89 vs. 88%). Lower rates of late genitourinary toxicity were demonstrated within the SRT arm, favouring early SRT in clinical practice.The addition of pelvic lymph node radiotherapy recently demonstrated an improvement in freedom from progression within the randomized RTOG 0534 trial, especially for patients with pretreatment prostate serum antigen (PSA) levels more than 0.35 ng/ml. The most appropriate androgen deprivation therapy duration remains a point of controversy.

SUMMARY

The SRT approach can be favoured for the vast majority of patients, provided close monitoring of PSA and early treatment in the event of biochemical recurrence. Radiotherapy dose and volumes and ADT use might be correlated to SRT timing (early vs. late). Results from trials including genomic tests and metabolic imaging will probably help to refine these criteria.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

BACKGROUND

Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management.

OBJECTIVE

To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.

Multimodality Therapies for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multimodality therapy including radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy are frequently deployed in the management of localized prostate cancer. We sought to perform a critical appraisal of the most contemporary literature focusing on the multimodality management of localized prostate cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Men who are ideal candidates for multimodality therapy include those with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease, high-risk disease, and very high-risk disease. Enhancements in both systemic agents (including second-generation antiandrogens) as well as localized therapies (such as stereotactic body radiotherapy and brachytherapy) are refining the optimal balance between the use of systemic and local therapies for localized prostate cancer. Genomic predictors are emerging as critical tools for more precisely allocating treatment intensification with multimodality therapies as well as treatment de-intensification. Close collaboration among medical oncologists, surgeons, and radiation oncologists will be critical for coordinating evidence-based multimodality therapies when clearly indicated and for supporting shared decision-making in areas where the evidence is mixed.

The impact of salvage radiotherapy initiation at PSA ≤ 0.5 ng/ml on metastasis-free survival in patients with relapsed prostate cancer following prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Salvage radiation therapy (SRT) is indicated for biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Prior data have shown that initiation of SRT at lower PSA levels improves subsequent biochemical control, yet given the long natural history of prostate cancer questions remain regarding optimal timing of SRT. We analyzed the impact of prostate specific antigen (PSA) level at time of salvage radiotherapy with regard to both biochemical relapse-free (bRFS) as well as metastasis-free survival (MFS) in patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer.

METHODS

Using prospective institutional tumor registry data, univariate and multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to assess association between outcomes and clinical and pathologic prognostic features, including pre-SRT PSA, interval from prostatectomy to SRT, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), and adverse pathologic features.

RESULTS

We identified 397 patients who received salvage RT between 1985 and 2016: 187 (45.8%) received SRT initiated when pre-RT PSA was ≤0.5 ng/ml; 212 (52.0%) patients had pre-SRT PSA > 0.5 ng/ml. Independent of pathologic risk status and ADT use, pre-SRT PSA ≤ 0.5 ng/ml was the most significant predictor of bRFS (HR 0.39, 95% CI [0.27, 0.56]) as well as MFS (HR = 0.58, 95% CI [0.37, 0.91]). Seminal vesicle invasion was also associated with shorter interval to biochemical failure, HR = 1.79, 95% CI [1.07, 2.98], and eventual metastases, HR = 2.07, 95% CI [1.14, 3.740].

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of salvage RT while PSA levels remain ≤0.5 ng/ml was associated with improved MFS. Consideration for salvage RT initiation while PSA levels remain low is warranted to minimize risk of future prostate cancer metastasis.

Predicting tumour radiosensitivity to deliver precision radiotherapy

Owing to advances in radiotherapy, the physical properties of radiation can be optimized to enable individualized treatment; however, optimization is rarely based on biological properties and, therefore, treatments are generally planned with the assumption that all tumours respond similarly to radiation. Radiation affects multiple cellular pathways, including DNA damage, hypoxia, proliferation, stem cell phenotype and immune response. In this Review, we summarize the effect of these pathways on tumour responses to radiotherapy and the current state of research on genomic classifiers designed to exploit these variations to inform treatment decisions. We also discuss whether advances in genomics have generated evidence that could be practice changing and whether advances in genomics are now ready to be used to guide the delivery of radiotherapy alone or in combination.

Efficacy and safety of salvage radiotherapy combined with endocrine therapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The addition of endocrine therapy to salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is expected to further improve the prognosis of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP). The quantitative synthesis of clinical outcomes of SRT combined with endocrine therapy is limited. Whether salvage radiotherapy plus endocrine therapy remains inconclusive. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of salvage radiotherapy combined with endocrine therapy in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library was performed for articles published between January 1, 2012 and October 10, 2022. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration Software). Main outcome and measures included biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), metastasis free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and Grade 3 or higher adverse events (3+AEs), including acute and late adverse events.

Results

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, 4 randomized controlled studies enrolling 2731 male (1374 of whom received SRT combined with endocrine therapy and 1357 controls) met the inclusion criteria. SRT combined with endocrine therapy were related to significantly improve bPFS (HR=0.52; 95% CI: 0.46 0.59; p<0.00001) and MFS (HR=0.75; 95% CI: 0.64 0.88; p<0.001). Compared with SRT alone, the combination therapy tended to be associated with prolong OS (HR=0.83; 95% CI: 0.69-1.01; p=0.06), but not statistically significant. At early follow-up, the risk of acute AEs was comparable in the two groups (RR=1.04; 95% CI: 0.22-4.85). However, the risk of late AEs was higher in the combination group at later follow-up (RR=1.33; 95% CI: 1.09-1.62).

Conclusions

This systematic review and meta-analysis found superior efficacy associated with adding endocrine therapy to SRT compared with SRT alone in patients with biochemical recurrence after RP. Additional endocrine therapy is safe and feasible for patients with biochemical recurrence after RP.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier (CRD42022365432).

When to order genomic tests: development and external validation of a model to predict high-risk prostate cancer at the genotypic level

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to develop a model to predict high-genomic-risk prostate cancer (PCa) according to Decipher score, a validated 22 gene prognostic panel. By doing so, one might select the individuals who are likely to benefit from genomic testing and improve pre-op counseling about the need for adjuvant treatments.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed IRB-approved databases at two institutions. All patients had preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and Decipher prostate radical prostatectomy (RP), a validated 22 gene prognostic panel. We used binary logistic regression to estimate high-risk Decipher (Decipher score > 0.60) probability on RP specimen. Area under the curve (AUC) and calibration were used to assess the accuracy of the model in the development and validation cohort. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to assess the clinical benefit of the model.

RESULTS

The development and validation cohort included 622 and 185 patients with 283 (35%) and 80 (43%) of those with high-risk Decipher. The multivariable model included PSA density, biopsy Gleason Grade Group, percentage of positive cores and MRI extracapsular extension. AUC was 0.73 after leave-one-out cross-validation. DCA showed a clinical benefit in a range of probabilities between 15 and 60%. In the external validation cohort, AUC was 0.70 and calibration showed that the model underestimates the actual probability of the outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed model to predict high-risk Decipher score at RP is helpful to improve risk stratification of patients with PCa and to assess the need for additional testing and treatments.

Using PSMA imaging for prognostication in localized and advanced prostate cancer

The use of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-directed applications in modern prostate cancer management has evolved rapidly over the past few years, helping to establish new treatment pathways and provide further insights into prostate cancer biology. However, the prognostic implications of PSMA-PET have not been studied systematically, owing to rapid clinical implementation without long follow-up periods to determine intermediate-term and long-term oncological outcomes. Currently available data suggest that traditional prognostic factors and survival outcomes are associated with high PSMA expression (both according to immunohistochemistry and PET uptake) in men with localized and biochemically recurrent disease. Treatment with curative intent (primary and/or salvage) often fails when PSMA-positive metastases are present; however, the sensitivity of PSMA-PET in detecting all metastases is poor. Low PSMA-PET uptake in recurrent disease is a favourable prognostic factor; however, it can be associated with poor prognosis in conjunction with high ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Clinical trials embedding PSMA-PET for guiding management with reliable oncological outcomes are needed to support ongoing clinical use.

Genomic Classifiers in Personalized Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy Approaches: A Systematic Review and Future Perspectives Based on International Consensus

Current risk-stratification systems for prostate cancer (PCa) do not sufficiently reflect the disease heterogeneity. Genomic classifiers (GC) enable improved risk stratification after surgery, but less data exist for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT) or RT in oligo-/metastatic disease stages. To guide future perspectives of GCs for RT, we conducted (1) a systematic review on the evidence of GCs for patients treated with RT and (2) a survey of experts using the Delphi method, addressing the role of GCs in personalized treatments to identify relevant fields of future clinical and translational research. We performed a systematic review and screened ongoing clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Based on these results, a multidisciplinary international team of experts received an adapted Delphi method survey. Thirty-one and 30 experts answered round 1 and round 2, respectively. Questions with ≥75% agreement were considered relevant and included in the qualitative synthesis. Evidence for GCs as predictive biomarkers is mainly available to the postoperative RT setting. Validation of GCs as prognostic markers in the definitive RT setting is emerging. Experts used GCs in patients with PCa with extensive metastases (30%), in postoperative settings (27%), and in newly diagnosed PCa (23%). Forty-seven percent of experts do not currently use GCs in clinical practice. Expert consensus demonstrates that GCs are promising tools to improve risk-stratification in primary and oligo-/metastatic patients in addition to existing classifications. Experts were convinced that GCs might guide treatment decisions in terms of RT-field definition and intensification/deintensification in various disease stages. This work confirms the value of GCs and the promising evidence of GC utility in the setting of RT. Additional studies of GCs as prognostic biomarkers are anticipated and form the basis for future studies addressing predictive capabilities of GCs to optimize RT and systemic therapy. The expert consensus points out future directions for GC research in the management of PCa.

Integration of survival data from multiple studies

We introduce a statistical procedure that integrates datasets from multiple biomedical studies to predict patients' survival, based on individual clinical and genomic profiles. The proposed procedure accounts for potential differences in the relation between predictors and outcomes across studies, due to distinct patient populations, treatments and technologies to measure outcomes and biomarkers. These differences are modeled explicitly with study-specific parameters. We use hierarchical regularization to shrink the study-specific parameters towards each other and to borrow information across studies. The estimation of the study-specific parameters utilizes a similarity matrix, which summarizes differences and similarities of the relations between covariates and outcomes across studies. We illustrate the method in a simulation study and using a collection of gene expression datasets in ovarian cancer. We show that the proposed model increases the accuracy of survival predictions compared to alternative meta-analytic methods.