Current Management Strategy for Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer

Prognostic Value of the Intermediate-risk Feature in Men with Favorable Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer: Implications for Active Surveillance

Background

Guidelines suggest that active surveillance (AS) may be considered for select patients with favorable intermediate-risk (fIR) prostate cancer.

Objective

To compare the outcomes between fIR prostate cancer patients included by Gleason score (GS) or prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Most patients are classified with fIR disease due to either a 3 + 4 = 7 GS (fIR-GS) or a PSA level of 10-20 ng/ml (fIR-PSA). Previous research suggests that inclusion by GS 7 may be associated with worse outcomes.

Design setting and participants

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of US veterans diagnosed with fIR prostate cancer from 2001 to 2015.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

We compared the incidence of metastatic disease, prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), all-cause mortality (ACM), and receipt of definitive treatment between fIR-PSA and fIR-GS patients managed with AS. Outcomes were compared with those of a previously published cohort of patients with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease using cumulative incidence function and Gray's test for statistical significance.

Results and limitations

The cohort included 663 men; 404 had fIR-GS (61%) and 249 fIR-PSA (39%). There was no evidence of difference in the incidence of metastatic disease (8.6% vs 5.8%, p = 0.77), receipt of definitive treatment (77.6% vs 81.5%, p = 0.43), PCSM (5.7% vs 2.5%, p = 0.274), and ACM (16.8% vs 19.1%, p = 0.14) between the fIR-PSA and fIR-GS groups at 10 yr. On multivariate regression, unfavorable intermediate-risk disease was associated with higher rates of metastatic disease, PCSM, and ACM. Limitations included varying surveillance protocols.

Conclusions

There is no evidence of difference in oncological and survival outcomes between men with fIR-PSA and fIR-GS prostate cancer undergoing AS. Thus, presence of GS 7 disease alone should not exclude patients from consideration of AS. Shared decision-making should be utilized to optimize management for each patient.

Patient summary

In this report, we compared the outcomes of men with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer in the Veterans Health Administration. We found no significant difference between survival and oncological outcomes.

The microbiome and prostate cancer

There is growing evidence that the microbiome is involved in development and treatment of many human diseases, including prostate cancer. There are several potential pathways for microbiome-based mechanisms for the development of prostate cancer: direct impacts of microbes or microbial products in the prostate or the urine, and indirect impacts from microbes or microbial products in the gastrointestinal tract. Unique microbial signatures have been identified within the stool, oral cavity, tissue, urine, and blood of prostate cancer patients, but studies vary in their findings. Recent studies describe potential diagnostic and therapeutic applications of the microbiome, but further clinical investigation is needed. In this review, we explore the existing literature on the discovery of the human microbiome and its relationship to prostate cancer.

Optimal Use of Tumor-Based Molecular Assays for Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSEOF REVIEW

The use of genomic testing for prostate cancer continues to grow; however, utilization remains institutionally dependent. Herein, we review current tissue-based markers and comment on current use with active surveillance and prostate MRI.

RECENT FINDINGS

While data continues to emerge, several studies have shown a role for genomic testing for treatment selection. Novel testing options include ConfirmMDx, ProMark, Prolaris, and Decipher, which have shown utility in select patients. The current body of literature on this specific topic remains very limited; prospective trials with long-term follow-up are needed to improve our understanding on how these genomic tests fit when combined with our current clinical tools. As the literature matures, it is likely that newer risk calculators that combine our classic clinical variables with genomic and imaging data will be developed to bring about standard protocols for prostate cancer decision-making.

Detection of TMPRSS2-ERG Fusion Transcript in Biopsy Specimen of Prostate Cancer Patients: A Single Centre Experience

INTRODUCTION

Prostate carcinoma is the most frequent malign neoplasm among men with an ever-growing incidence rate. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion transcript leads to the androgen induction of ERG proto-oncogenes expression, representing a high presence of oncogenes alteration among prostate tumour cells.

AIM

The aim of this research was to detect and evaluate theTMPRSS2-ERG fuse transcript in the tissues of patients with prostate cancer, and establish a base of material of these samples for further genetic examination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The research was a prospective clinical study that involved and focused on random sampling of 101 patients (62 with prostate cancer-study group and 39 with benign changes in the prostate-control group). Real time PCR analysis for detection of the TMPRSS2-ERG fusion transcript in prostate tissue was performed and also data from the histopathology results of tissues were used, as well as data for the level of PSA (prostate-specific antigen) in blood.

RESULTS

TMPRSS2-ERG fusion transcript was detected in 20 out of 62 (32.2%) patients with prostate carcinoma and among no patients with benign changes whatsoever. There were no significant differences between patients with/without detected TMPRSS2-ERG fusion related to Gleason score. Among 50%, in the study group this score was greater than 7 per/for Median IQR=7 (6-8). Significant difference was recognized, related to the average value of PSA in favour of significantly higher value of PSA in the study group with prostate cancer, but there was also no significant difference between samples with prostate cancer who were with/without detected TMPRSS2-ERG fusion transcript related to PSA level.

DISCUSSION

The results from this research are in accordance with the values and results from analyses done in several research centres and oncological institutes.

CONCLUSION

The positive findings in small scale studies encourage the implementation of larger scale studies that will be enriched with results of genetic transcript in blood and urine and will define the positive diagnostic meaning of the TMPRSS-ERG fusion transcript.

Patients with Biopsy Gleason Score 3 + 4 Are Not Appropriate Candidates for Active Surveillance

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of including patients with biopsy Gleason score (bGS) 3 + 4 prostate cancer in an active surveillance (AS) protocol.

METHODS

A total of 615 patients underwent a radical prostatectomy and satisfied the following requirements: prostate-specific antigen ≤10 ng/dL, clinical stage T1c or T2a, 2 or fewer positive biopsy cores, and bGS 6 or 3 + 4 prostate cancer. The patients were divided into two groups according to their bGS (bGS 6 group, n =534; bGS 3 + 4 group, n = 81).

RESULTS

The adverse pathological features were significantly higher in the bGS 3 + 4 group (16.7 vs. 49.4%, p< 0.001). Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival was also significantly lower in this group (p < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, clinical stage (odds ratio [OR] 2.026, p =0.007), maximum percentage of biopsy core involvement (OR 1.015, p = 0.014), and bGS (OR 1.913, p = 0.030) were independent risk factors for adverse pathological features. However, the bGS was the only variable to forecast BCR (hazard ratio 3.567, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A bGS 3 + 4 was the leading risk factor for a worse postoperative prognosis. Therefore, patients with a bGS 3 + 4 are not appropriate candidates for AS.

Outcomes of Serial Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Subsequent Biopsy in Men with Low-risk Prostate Cancer Managed with Active Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and subsequent biopsy in monitoring prostate cancer (PCa) in men on active surveillance (AS) have not been defined clearly.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether changes in serial mpMRI can predict pathological upgrade among men with grade group (GG) 1 PCa managed with AS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective analysis of men with GG1 on AS with at least two consecutive mpMRI examinations during 2012-2018 who underwent mpMRI/ultrasound fusion or systematic biopsies.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Progression on serial mpMRI was evaluated as a predictor of pathological upgrading to GG≥2 on a follow-up biopsy using clinical, pathological, and imaging factors in binary logistic regression. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were determined.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 122 patients, 29 men (23.8%) experienced pathological upgrade on the follow-up biopsy. Progression on mpMRI was not associated with pathological upgrade. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of mpMRI progression for predicting pathological upgrade were 41.3%, 54.8%, 22.2%, and 75%, respectively. Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.17, p=0.006), Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score on initial mpMRI (4-5 vs ≤3, OR 7.48, p=0.01), number of positive systematic cores (OR 1.84, p=0.03), number of positive targeted cores (OR 0.44, p=0.04), and maximum percent of targeted core tumor involvement (OR 1.04, p=0.01) were significantly associated with pathological upgrade.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe an association between mpMRI progression and pathological upgrade; however, a PI-RADS score of 4-5 on initial mpMRI was predictive of subsequent pathological progression. The continued use of systematic and fusion biopsies appears necessary due to risks of reclassification over time.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Progression on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance (AS) is not associated with progression on the follow-up biopsy. Both systematic and fusion biopsies are necessary to sufficiently capture progression during AS.

Emerging biomarkers in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men worldwide. A large proportion of PCa are latent, never destined to progress or affect the patients’ life. It is of utmost importance to identify which PCa are destined to progress and which would benefit from an early radical treatment. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains the most used test to detect PCa. Its limited specificity and an elevated rate of overdiagnosis are the main problems associated with PSA testing. New PCa biomarkers have been proposed to improve the accuracy of PSA in the management of early PCa. Commercially available biomarkers such as PCA3 score, Prostate Health Index (PHI), and the four-kallikrein panel are used with the purpose of reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies and providing information related to the aggressiveness of the tumor. The relationship with PCa aggressiveness seems to be confirmed by PHI and the four-kallikrein panel, but not by the PCA3 score. In this review, we also summarize new promising biomarkers, such as PSA glycoforms, TMPRSS2:ERG fusion gene, microRNAs, circulating tumor cells, androgen receptor variants, and PTEN gene. All these emerging biomarkers could change the management of early PCa, offering more accurate results than PSA. Nonetheless, large prospective studies comparing these new biomarkers among them are required to know their real value in PCa detection and prognosis.

Patient and provider experiences with active surveillance: A scoping review

Objective

Active surveillance (AS) represents a fundamental shift in managing select cancer patients that initiates treatment only upon disease progression to avoid overtreatment. Given uncertain outcomes, patient engagement could support decision-making about AS. Little is known about how to optimize patient engagement for AS decision-making. This scoping review aimed to characterize research on patient and provider communication about AS, and associated determinants and outcomes.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library were searched from 2006 to October 2016. English language studies that evaluated cancer patient or provider AS views, experiences or behavioural interventions were eligible. Screening and data extraction were done in duplicate. Summary statistics were used to describe study characteristics and findings.

Results

A total of 2,078 studies were identified, 1,587 were unique, and 1,243 were excluded based on titles/abstracts. Among 344 full-text articles, 73 studies were eligible: 2 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 4 chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 6 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and 61 prostate cancer. The most influential determinant of initiating AS was physician recommendation. Others included higher socioeconomic status, smaller tumor size, comorbid disease, older age, and preference to avoid adverse treatment effects. AS patients desired more information about AS and reassurance about future treatment options, involvement in decision-making and assessment of illness uncertainty and supportive care needs during follow-up. Only three studies of prostate cancer evaluated interventions to improve AS communication or experience.

Conclusions

This study revealed a paucity of research on AS communication for DCIS, RCC and CLL, but generated insight on how to optimize AS discussions in the context of routine care or clinical trials from research on AS for prostate cancer. Further research is needed on AS for patients with DCIS, RCC and CLL, and to evaluate interventions aimed at patients and/or providers to improve AS communication, experience and associated outcomes.

Survival outcomes for patients with localised upper tract urothelial carcinoma managed with non-definitive treatment

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the outcomes of patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) with non-definitive therapy, which currently remains unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to identify individuals with a localised, histologically confirmed kidney/renal pelvis and ureteric UC. Survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier method was performed. A competing risk model evaluated the cumulative incidence and predictors of cancer-specific mortality (CSM).

RESULTS

We identified 633 (7.6%) individuals who did not receive surgery. These individuals were significantly older (median age 81 vs 71 years, P < 0.001) than surgically managed patients. The median overall survival (OS) was significantly shorter compared to the surgical cohort (1.9 vs 7.8 years, P < 0.001). The 3-year disease-specific survival (DSS) for patients without surgery was significantly lower compared to those with surgery, at 73.7% vs 92.4%, respectively (P < 0.001). The 3-year DSS for patients with high-grade tumours was worse when compared to patients with low-grade tumours, at 65.1% vs 82.9%, respectively (P < 0.001). The 3-year cumulative CSM was 26.3%. On multivariable analysis, older age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.05, P < 0.001) and high tumour grade (HR 1.88, P < 0.001) were predictors of worse outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based cohort, 7.6% of patients with UTUC were managed with a non-definitive approach. The median OS for the untreated cohort was significantly shorter compared to the surgical cohort (1.9 vs 7.8 years, respectively). These data may be helpful in counselling patients who are poor surgical candidates, as non-definitive therapy may provide reasonable oncological outcomes.