Prostate specific antigen density as a prognostic factor for patients with prostate carcinoma treated with radiotherapy

Prostate-specific antigen density predicts adverse pathology and increased risk of biochemical failure

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (PSAD), measured using either ultrasound (US) or prostatic weight (PW), is an independent predictor of adverse pathologic findings or biochemical-free survival and whether it outperformed PSA.

METHODS

The data were obtained prospectively from 1327 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy from 1990 to 2003. The US PSAD was calculated by dividing the preoperative PSA level in nanograms per milliliter by the US measured prostate volume in cubic centimeters. The PW PSAD was calculated by dividing the PSA value in nanograms per milliliter by the measured PW of the prostatectomy specimen in grams. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether the US or PW PSAD was more accurate than the PSA level in predicting for adverse pathologic findings. A proportional hazards model was used to determine whether PSAD more accurately predicted for biochemical failure (PSA level greater 0.2 ng/mL).

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis demonstrated that US and PW PSAD were independent predictors of positive margins (odds ratio [OR] 5.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.65 to 9.47 and OR 29.75, 95% CI 10.18 to 86.96, respectively), extracapsular disease (OR 10.89, 95% CI 5.32 to 22.32 and OR 126.62, 95% CI 37.99 to 422.07, respectively), seminal vesical invasion (OR 6.06, 95% CI 2.96 to 12.41 and OR 33.72, 95% CI 9.79 to 116.15, respectively), and biochemical failure (hazard ratio 3.32, 95% CI 2.38 to 4.63 and hazard ratio 8.70, 95% CI 5.21 to 14.52, respectively). The C-index demonstrated that both US and PW PSAD appeared more discriminant for adverse pathologic findings and biochemical failure than did the PSA level.

CONCLUSIONS

The US and PW PSAD are strong predictors of advanced pathologic features and biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. The incorporation of PSAD into the risk assessment could provide additional prognostic information beyond grade, stage, and PSA level; therefore, the inclusion of PSAD into nomograms should be considered.

Predicting time to prostate cancer recurrence based on joint models for non-linear longitudinal biomarkers and event time outcomes

Biological markers that are both sensitive and specific for tumour regrowth or metastasis are increasingly becoming available and routinely monitored during the regular follow-up of patients treated for cancer. Obtained by a simple blood test, these markers provide an inexpensive non-invasive means for the early detection of recurrence (or progression). Currently, the longitudinal behaviour of the marker is viewed as an indicator of early disease progression, and is applied by a physician in making clinical decisions. One marker that has been studied for use in both population screening for early disease and for detection of recurrence in prostate cancer patients is PSA. The elevation of PSA levels is known to precede clinically detectable recurrence by 2 to 5 years, and current clinical practice often relies partially on multiple recent rises in PSA to trigger a change in treatment. However, the longitudinal trajectory for individual markers is often non-linear; in many cases there is a decline immediately following radiation therapy or surgery, a plateau during remission, followed by an exponential rise following the recurrence of the cancer. The aim of this article is to determine the multiple aspects of the longitudinal PSA biomarker trajectory that can be most sensitive for predicting time to clinical recurrence. Joint Bayesian models for the longitudinal measures and event times are utilized based on non-linear hierarchical models, implied by unknown change-points, for the longitudinal trajectories, and a Cox proportional hazard model for progression times, with functionals of the longitudinal parameters as covariates in the Cox model. Using Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling schemes, the joint model is fit to longitudinal PSA measures from 676 patients treated at Massachusetts General Hospital between the years 1988 and 1995 with follow-up to 1999. Based on these data, predictive schemes for detecting cancer recurrence in new patients based on their longitudinal trajectory are derived.

Evaluation of prostate volume by transrectal ultrasonography for use in a brachytherapy program

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate two methods of measuring the prostate volume using transrectal ultrasonography. The measurements were performed in vivo at preplanning and again preoperatively in connection with brachytherapy. The accurate measurement of the prostate volume is important in a brachytherapy program for treatment planning.

METHODS

A total of 43 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer underwent prospective determination of the prostate volume, by one physician, using transrectal ultrasonography. Volume calculations were made at the preplanning and preoperative settings, both by a hand-held rectal probe using the prolate ellipsoid formula and by a mounted probe in a stepping device using the planimetric method.

RESULTS

The coefficient of variation between the preplanning and preoperative prostate volumes with the probe holder was less than 3% compared with the hand-held probe, which was greater than 10%. The difference between the median values at the preplanning and preoperative settings by serial planimetry was 2.5 cm(3) (range 0.2 to 9.4). The difference in the median volumes between the preplanning and preoperative ellipsoid calculations was 6.7 cm(3) (range 0.3 to 38.7). The difference between the median values with the ellipsoid volume was significant (P <0.001). The Pearson correlation coefficient for all values using the planimetric method was 0.92 versus 0.58 for the ellipsoid method. The correlation coefficient was significantly greater for the planimetric method (P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of these data, planimetric prostate volume determination, by a single ultrasonographer, is an accurate and reproducible method with applicability to a brachytherapy program.

PSA-based outcome analysis after radiation therapy for prostate cancer: a new definition of biochemical failure after intervention

OBJECTIVES

To examine pretreatment variables that influence biochemical failure, and to describe and test a new definition of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based biochemical failure.

METHODS

We introduce and describe a new definition of biochemical failure, which is based on quadratic fitting of the logarithm of the follow-up PSA profile curve. From a data base of 449 patients with prostate cancer treated with definitive radiation therapy, 230 patients who had at least five follow-up PSA observations were chosen for analysis. The new definition of failure was applied to this cohort, as was the conventional definition of two consecutive PSA rises. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using established pretreatment prognostic factors as covariates. Also, the association of both definitions of failure with clinical outcome (local recurrence and any recurrence) was examined.

RESULTS

Application of the new definition of biochemical failure resulted in smoothing of the "noise" that is inherent in using definitions based on successive PSA rises. This smoothing was verified by smaller P values for the statistically significant covariates in the univariate analysis. Furthermore, the new definition correlated better with clinical outcome, as demonstrated by the statistically significant P values on regression analysis when using the quadratic fitted nadir compared with using the observed nadir.

CONCLUSIONS

We devised a new criterion based on quadratic curve fitting for PSA-based biochemical failure. This definition is based on all available PSA information, correlates with both pretreatment factors and post-treatment clinical outcome, is relatively insensitive to noise, and allows for prediction of time of failure.

Relationship of ultrasound staging and bilateral biopsy positivity to outcome in stage T1c prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy

OBJECTIVES

The strict definition of Stage T1c prostate cancer is that the tumor is not palpable on digital rectal examination (DRE) or seen on imaging studies such as ultrasound. The inclusion of ultrasound imaging was brought about without an understanding of the relationship between ultrasound upstaging and prognosis. We have also noticed that in clinical practice, treatment decisions are made on the basis of the finding of bilateral versus unilateral biopsy positivity. The objectives in this study were to determine the prognostic significance of upstaging by transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) to uT2 or uT3, and unilateral versus bilateral biopsy positivity in patients with Stage T1c cancer as determined by DRE (DRE-Stage T1c patients).

METHODS

Between 1987 and 1995 there were 643 patients with DRE-Stage T1-T2 prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy; 24 had T1a, 76 had T1b, 183 had T1c, 133 had T2a, 168 had T2b, and 59 had T2c. Of these, 135 DRE-Stage T1c patients underwent ultrasound staging and 122 underwent bilateral prostate biopsies. All had pretreatment prostate-specific antigen values (PSAs) available and no patient received adjuvant androgen ablation. The median pretreatment PSA was 9.1 ng/mL, median radiotherapy dose was 66.0 Gy, and median follow-up was 41 months. Post-treatment failure was defined as disease recurrence and/or two elevations in PSA on consecutive follow-up visits.

RESULTS

The 5-year freedom from failure rate for DRE-Stage T1c patients (71%) was not significantly different from that of DRE-Stage T1b (65%) or DRE-Stage T2a (71%) patients. There was a trend (P = 0.1) toward a worse outcome for DRE-Stage T2b/T2c patients compared with DRE-Stage T1b/T1c/T2a patients. The distribution of DRE-Stage T1c patients by ultrasound staging was 29 with uT1c, 88 with uT2, and 18 with uT3 findings. Twenty percent of patients had bilateral positive biopsy specimens. In univariate and multivariate analyses, the only correlates of patient outcome were pretreatment PSA (P < or = 0.002) and isocenter dose (P = 0.03). TRUS upstaging had no effect on freedom from failure; uT1c patients had about the same risk of relapse or a rising PSA as uT2 or uT3 patients. Patients with bilateral positive prostate biopsy specimens had about the same prognosis as those with unilateral positive biopsy specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with DRE-Stage T1c prostate cancer, the data indicate that ultrasound staging and bilateral biopsy positivity are not predictive of outcome for patients treated with external beam radiotherapy and treatment decisions should not be based on these parameters.

Is prostate specific antigen density an important prognostic indicator for patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam therapy?

The purpose of this study was to determine if prostate specific antigen density (PSAD) is a predictor of outcome following external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer, and to compare it with other prognostic factors. Between January 1990 and December 1993, 205 patients with T1-T3 adenocarcinoma of the prostate received a radical course of external beam irradiation, with no prior or adjuvant hormonal therapy. All patients had pre- and post-treatment serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) evaluation. They were followed up for at least 24 months. PSAD was defined as the ratio of pre-treatment serum PSA to the prostate volume, as determined from CT treatment planning scans. Prostate volumes were calculated using the prostate ellipse formula. Median PSA density was 0.37, with a range 0.01-6.7. Biochemical failure was defined as three consecutive rises in serum PSA, regardless of the magnitude of elevation. 4-year biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) for patients with PSAD < or = 0.3 was 60%, compared with 22% for patients with PSAD > 0.3 (p = < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, pre-treatment PSA (p = < 0.001), Gleason score (p = 0.002), and stage (p = 0.03) were independent predictors of BDFS, while PSAD was not an important prognosticator (p = 0.62). Pre-treatment serum PSA is the most important prognosticator of BDFS, following external beam radiotherapy, for patients with prostate cancer. PSA density did not predict treatment outcome.

Radiotherapy options for localized prostate cancer based upon pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen levels and biochemical control: a comprehensive review of the literature

PURPOSE

To review all the available radiotherapy (RT) literature on localized prostate cancer treatment where serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were used to both stratify patients and evaluate outcome and determine if any conclusions can be reached regarding an optimal radiotherapeutic management for this disease.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A MEDLINE search was conducted to obtain all articles in English on prostate cancer treatment employing RT from 1986-1997. Studies were considered eligible for review only if they met all the following criteria: 1) pretreatment PSA values were recorded and grouped for subsequent evaluation, 2) posttreatment PSA values were continuously monitored, 3) definitions of biochemical control were stated, and 4) the median follow-up was given.

RESULTS

Of the 246 articles identified, only 20 met the inclusion criteria; 4 using conformal external beam RT, 8 using conventional external beam RT, and 8 using interstitial brachytherapy (4 using a permanent implant alone, 3 combining external beam RT with a permanent implant, and 1 combining a conformal temporary interstitial implant boost with external beam RT). No studies using neutrons (with or without external beam RT) or androgen deprivation (combined with external beam RT) were identified where patients were stratified by pretreatment PSA levels. Results for all therapies were extremely variable with the 3-5-year rates of biochemical control for patients with pretreatment PSA levels < or = 4 ng/ml ranging from 48 to 100%, for PSA levels >4 and < or = 10 ng/ml ranging from 44 to 90%, for PSA levels >10 and < or = 20 ng/ml ranging from 27 to 89%, and for PSA levels >20 ranging from 14 to 89%. The median Gleason score, T-stage, definition of biochemical control, and follow-up were substantially different from series to series. No RT option consistently produced superior results.

CONCLUSIONS

When data are reviewed from studies using serum PSA levels to stratify patients and to evaluate treatment outcome, no consistently superior RT technique was identified. These data suggest that standard definitions of disease stage (combining clinical, pathologic, and biochemical criteria) and a common definition of biochemical cure (as developed by the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus Panel) need to be adopted to evaluate treatment efficacy and advise patients on the most appropriate radiotherapeutic option for their disease.

External beam radiotherapy dose response of prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the external beam radiotherapy dose response of palpable Stage T1-T4, mostly Nx, patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

There were 938 men consecutively treated between 1987 and 1995 who had pretreatment prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels. Posttreatment failure was defined as disease recurrence and/or two elevations in PSA on consecutive follow-up visits. The radiotherapy technique consisted of a four-field box with a small four-field reduction after 46 Gy in 844 patients (total dose of 60-70 Gy) or with a six-field conformal boost after 46 Gy in 94 patients (total dose of 74-78 Gy). Neoadjuvant or adjuvant androgen ablation was not used in any patient. Median follow-up was 40 months.

RESULTS

The mean and median radiotherapy doses for the entire group were 67.8 +/- 13.3 Gy (+/-SEM) and 66 Gy. The mean radiotherapy dose was higher in those who had Stage T3/T4 disease, Gleason scores of 8-10, or pretreatment PSAs of > 4 ng/ml. In general, patients with more aggressive pretreatment prognostic features were treated to higher doses; yet, those that relapsed or had a rising PSA were treated to significantly lower doses. Actuarial analyses were facilitated by dividing patients into three dose groups: < or = 67, > 67-77, and > 77 Gy. The actuarial freedom from failure rates at 3 years were 61, 74, and 96% for the low, intermediate, and high dose groups. Stratification of the patients by pretreatment PSA revealed that dose was a significant correlate of freedom from relapse or a rising PSA for those with PSAs > 4-10, > 10-20, and > 20 ng/ml. The only patients in which an improvement in outcome was not related to higher doses were those with a pretreatment PSA < or = 4 ng/ml. Dose was significantly associated with freedom from failure for Stage T1/T2 and Stage T3/T4 patients, as well as for those stratified by Gleason score. Multivariate analysis using Cox proportional hazards models showed that dose was an independent and highly significant predictor of relapse or a rising PSA.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective review strongly indicates that radiotherapy dose to the prostate is critical to the cure of prostate cancer, even for favorable patients with pretreatment PSAs of > 4-10 ng/ml, Stages T1/T2, or Gleason scores of 2-6. Final confirmation awaits the results of our randomized trial.

Re-examining the role of prostate-specific antigen density in predicting outcome for clinically localized prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the prognostic significance of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) in clinically localized prostate cancer and determine whether this index is independent of or superior to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in predicting outcome of patients treated with external beam radiotherapy.

METHODS

Between January 1989 and December 1993, 175 evaluable patients with clinically localized prostate cancer received definitive radiotherapy using computed tomography (CT)-guided conformal techniques. PSAD was defined as the ratio of the pretreatment serum PSA to the prostate volume measured from CT treatment planning scans by one investigator. All PSA values were determined using the Hybritech assay. Biochemical failure was defined as two consecutive elevations in PSA separated by at least 3 months and a final PSA value greater than 1 ng/mL.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis including PSA and Gleason score revealed both to be statistically significant predictors of biochemical disease-free survival (P = 0.048 and P < 0.001, respectively). PSAD did not achieve significance on regression analysis. A direct multivariate analysis including PSA and PSAD required dichotomization in order to reduce high correlation. This analysis demonstrated a relative risk (RR) for failure of 1.27 (NS) for high PSA versus low PSA compared with a RR of 1.20 (NS) for high PSAD versus low PSAD. A regression model containing all three variables indicated only the Gleason score as significant in predicting biochemical failure.

CONCLUSIONS

These data do not suggest that PSAD is either an independent prognostic factor or a stronger discriminant of outcome than PSA in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with definitive external beam radiotherapy. Larger patient numbers with longer follow-up data, use of a clinical end point, or an analysis restricted to the appropriate subgroup may demonstrate the utility of PSAD in the future.

Prostate-specific antigen density

Nearly 20 years have passed since PSA was definitively identified. Throughout this period, its clinical application as a tumor marker has expanded significantly. Today, besides monitoring prostate cancer therapy, PSA is being used extensively in mass screening programs for early detection of adenocarcinoma of the prostate and has become the most important tumor marker in urologic oncology. Although of unquestionable importance, PSA is not the perfect marker because of its lack of efficacy in discriminating BPH from prostate cancer. In order to enhance its sensibility, specificity, and predictive value, a series of variables influencing PSA levels have been studied and new parameters developed to correct discrepancies or confounding factors. Recognition of the relationship between PSA, prostate volume, and their interference with serum PSA levels made possible the development of the PSAD concept. Its wide application in different sets of patients for diagnostic and staging purposes resulted in enough data to demonstrate its usefulness and cost effectiveness as a second-line screening parameter, helping to distinguish BPH from prostate cancer in patients with PSA levels in the intermediate area, and avoiding some unnecessary biopsies. Even though PSAD does not offer a definitive solution for prostate cancer screening or management, its association with all the other diagnostic methods may offer the best way to assess the population at risk and assure their well-being (Fig. 5).

Prostate-specific antigen cancer volume: a significant prognostic factor in prostate cancer patients at intermediate risk of failing radiotherapy

PURPOSE

Although the pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level (PSAL) is the single-most significant predictor of local and biochemical control in prostate cancer patients treated with radiotherapy, it is relatively insensitive for patients with a PSAL in the intermediate range (4-20 ng/ml). PSA density (PSAD) has been shown to be slightly more predictive of outcome than PSAL for this intermediate risk group; however, this improvement is small and of little use clinically. PSA cancer volume (PSACV), an estimate of cancer volume based on PSA, has recently been described and has been purported to be more significant than PSAL in predicting early biochemical failure after radiotherapy. We report a detailed comparison between this new prognostic factor, PSAL, and PSAD.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The records of 356 patients treated with definitive external beam radiotherapy for regionally localized (T1-4,Nx,M0) adenocarcinoma of the prostate were reviewed. Each patient had a PSAL, biopsy Gleason score, and pretreatment prostate volume by transrectal ultrasonography. The median PSAL was 9.3 ng/ml and 66% had Gleason scores in the 2-6 range. The median radiation dose was 66.0 Gy and the median follow-up for those living was 27 months. PSACV was calculated using a formula which takes into account PSAL, pretreatment prostate ultrasound volume, and Gleason score. The median PSACV was 1.43 cc. Biochemical failure was defined as increases in two consecutive follow-up PSA levels, one increase by a factor > 1.5, or an absolute increase of > 1 ng/ml. Local failure was defined as a cancer-positive prostate biopsy, obtained for evidence of tumor progression.

RESULTS

The distributions of PSACV and PSAL were similar and, when normalized by log transformation, were highly correlated (p < 0.0001, linear regression). There was a statistically significant relationship between PSACV and several potential prognostic factors including PSAL, PSAD, stage, Gleason score, and pretreatment prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP). In univariate analyses, PSACV, PSAL, and PSAD proved to be the most significant predictors of both biochemical and local control. In multivariate analyses using Cox proportional hazards models with PSAL, PSAD, PSACV, and PAP as continuous variables, PSAL, PSACV, and Gleason score were significant in predicting biochemical control. Only PSAL was significantly correlated with local control. However, when these analyses were restricted to patients with intermediate PSALs (4-20 ng/ml), only PSACV was significant for predicting both biochemical and local control.

CONCLUSION

PSACV was highly correlated with actuarial local and biochemical control and was superior to both PSAL and PSAD in predicting these outcomes in patients with PSALs between 4 and 20 ng/ml.