Pathologic Prostate Cancer Characteristics in Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance: A Head-to-Head Comparison of Contemporary Protocols

Comparative analysis of extracellular vesicles miRNAs (EV-miRNAs) and cell-free microRNAs (cf-miRNAs) reveals that EV-miRNAs are more promising as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for prostate cancer

MicroRNAs can be found intracellularly incorporated into extracellular vesicles (EV-miRNAs) or extracellularly as cell-free miRNAs (cf-miRNAs). This study aimed to compare the diagnostic and prognostic potential of four miRNAs with recognized roles in prostate cancer as cf-miRNAs and EV-miRNAs, obtained from liquid biopsies (LB). Total RNA was isolated from whole plasma and plasma EVs from 15 controls (CTR) and 30 patients (20 with localized prostate cancer (PCa), 10 with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa)). The miRNAs were quantified by RT-qPCR and the relative expression of these miRNAs was compared between the three groups, and their associations with clinicopathological parameters were assessed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were performed to evaluate the diagnostic potential of the miRNAs in discriminating different groups. Overall, EV-miRNAs showed higher expression compared to cf-miRNAs. All EV-miRNAs analyzed showed diagnostic potential with an area under the curve (AUC) above 0.744. EV-miR-21-5p, EV-miR-375-3p, and EV-miR-1290-3p were overexpressed in PCa and mPCa compared to CTR, while EV-miR-200c-3p was overexpressed only in mPCa in comparison to CTR. Remarkably, EV-miR-375-3p and EV-miR-1290-3p could differentiate mPCa with ISUP ≥ 3, demonstrating their prognostic potential. In addition, EV-miR-1290-3p and EV-4-miR-panel detected patients with PSA > 10 ng/mL. Cf-miRNAs performed lower than EV-miRNAs, which can be explained by the greater stability and specificity of EV-miRNAs, making them superior to cf-miRNA. The results show that LB, a non-invasive strategy, is clinically feasible to identify EV-miRNAs as biomarkers for PCa and may provide additional information for assessing PCa risk stratification.

Exosome miRNA-203 promotes M1 macrophage polarization and inhibits prostate cancer tumor progression

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a prevalent malignant neoplasm affecting the male reproductive system globally. However, the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches fall short of meeting the demands posed by PCa. Poor expression of miRNA-203 (miR-203) within PCa tissues and cells implies its potential utility as a diagnostic indicator for PCa. Exosomes (Exo), membranous vesicles released by various cells, are rich reservoirs of miRNAs. However, the presence of miR-203 presents within Exo derived from PCa cells remains unclarified. In this study, Exo was isolated from urine specimens collected from clinical PCa patients and LNCaP cells to detect miR-203 expression. Meanwhile, the impact of overexpressed miR-203 on M0 macrophages (mø) was analyzed. Subsequently, alterations in the proliferative, migratory, and invasive capacities of LNCaP cells were examined within a co-culture system featuring elevated miR-203 levels in both macrophages and LNCaP cells. Furthermore, the repercussions of miR-203 upregulation or inhibition were explored in a murine PCa tumor model. The results revealed that Exo manifested a circular or elliptical morphology, encapsulating a phospholipid bilayer approximately 100 nm in diameter. Notably, Exo readily infiltrated, with both Exo and miR-203-overexpressing Exo prompting macrophage polarization toward the M1 subtype. In the co-culture system, miR-203 exhibited pronounced suppression of LNCaP cell proliferation, migration, and invasion, while concurrently fostering apoptosis as compared with the LNCaP group (Control). In vivo experiments further disclosed that miR-203 greatly inhibited the growth of PCa tumors in nude mice. Markedly heightened expression of M1 macrophage markers such as IL-1β, IL-6, IL-12, CXCL9, and CXCL10 was observed within the tumor microenvironment following miR-203 intervention, as opposed to the model group. However, the introduction of miR-203 antagomir led to a reversal in tumor growth trends. This investigation indicates the presence of miR-203 within the urine of PCa patients and Exo originating from cells, and that miR-203 exerted antitumor effect by facilitating M1 macrophage polarization. Our study furnishes valuable insights into the potential applicability of miR-203 as a diagnostic biomarker and therapeutic target for PCa.

Cost-utility Analysis of Navigate, a Treatment Decision Aid for Men with Prostate Cancer and Their Partners, in Comparison to Usual Care

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Evidence on the cost effectiveness of decision aids to guide management decisions for men with prostate cancer is limited. We examined the cost utility of the Navigate online decision aid for men with prostate cancer in comparison to usual care (no decision aid).

METHODS

A Markov model with a 10-yr time horizon was constructed from a government health care perspective. Data from the Navigate trial (n = 302) and relevant published studies were used for model inputs. Incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated for the two strategies. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to address model uncertainty.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

On average, the Navigate strategy was estimated to cost AU$8899 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] AU$7509-AU$10438) and produce 7.08 QALYs (95% UI 6.73-7.36) in comparison to AU$9559 (95% UI AU$8177-AU$11017) and 7.03 QALYs (95% UI 6.67-7.31) or usual care. The Navigate strategy dominated usual care as it produced cost-savings and higher QALYs, although differences for both outcomes were small over 10 yr. The likelihood of Navigate being cost effective at a conventionally acceptable threshold of AU$50000 per QALY gained was 99.7%. This study is limited by the availability, quality, and choice of the data used in the model.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Use of an online decision aid for men with prostate cancer appears to be cost effective relative to usual care in Australia, driven by the higher acceptance and uptake of active surveillance. Wider implementation of decision aids may better inform men diagnosed with prostate cancer about their management options.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at the cost effectiveness of an online decision aid for guiding Australian men with prostate cancer in choosing a management option. We found that this decision aid was cost effective, mainly because more men chose active surveillance. Decision aids that inform patients about their management options should be more widely used in health care.

Prostate Cancer Tumor Volume and Genomic Risk

Background

Despite the historic association of higher prostate cancer volume with worse oncologic outcomes, little is known about the impact of tumor volume on cancer biology.

Objective

To characterize the relationship between tumor volume (measured by percent positive cores [PPC]) and cancer biology (measured by Decipher genomic risk classifier [GC]) in men who underwent prostate biopsy.

Design setting and participants

Prostate biopsies from 52 272 men profiled with Decipher captured in a population-based prospective tumor registry were collected from 2016 to 2021.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The degree of distribution and correlation of PPC with a GC score across grade group (GG) strata were examined using the Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson correlation coefficient, and multivariable linear regression controlled for clinicopathologic characteristics.

Results and limitations

A total of 38 921 (74%) biopsies passed quality control (14 331 GG1, 16 159 GG2, 5661 GG3, 1775 GG4, and 995 GG5). Median PPC and GC increased with sequentially higher GG. There was an increasingly positive correlation (r) between PPC and GC in GG2-5 prostate cancer (r [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 0.07 [0.5, 0.8] in GG2, 0.15 [0.12, 0.17] in GG3, 0.20 [0.15, 0.24] in GG4, and 0.25 [0.19, 0.31] in GG5), with no correlation in GG1 disease (r = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.001, 0.03]). In multivariable linear regression, GC was significantly associated with higher PPC for GG2-5 (all p < 0.05) but was not significantly associated with PPC for GG1. Limitations include retrospective design and a lack of final pathology from radical prostatectomy specimens.

Conclusions

Higher tumor volume was associated with worse GC for GG2-5 prostate cancer, whereas tumor volume was not associated with worse GC for GG1 disease. The finding that tumor volume is not associated with worse cancer biology in GG1 disease encourages active surveillance for most patients irrespective of tumor volume.

Patient summary

We studied the relationship between prostate cancer tumor volume and cancer biology, as measured by the Decipher genomic risk score, in men who underwent prostate biopsy. We found that tumor volume was not associated with worse cancer biology for low-grade prostate cancer. Our findings reassuringly support recent guidelines to recommend active surveillance for grade group 1 prostate cancer in most patients, irrespective of tumor volume.

The CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9 Prognostic Model Is Significantly Associated with Adverse Post-Surgical Pathology Outcomes

Objectives: To investigate the association of the prognostic risk score CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9 as measured on pre-surgical diagnostic needle biopsy tissue with pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomies in a clinically low−intermediate-risk patient cohort. Patients and Methods: RNA was extracted from biopsy punches of diagnostic needle biopsies. The patient cohort comprises n = 151 patients; of those n = 84 had low−intermediate clinical risk based on the CAPRA score and DRE clinical stage <cT3. This cohort (n = 84) was investigated for pathology outcomes in this study. RT-qPCR was performed to determine PDE4D5, PDE4D7 and PDE4D9 transcript scores in the cohorts. The CAPRA score was inferred from the relevant clinical data (patient age, PSA, cT, biopsy Gleason, and percentage tumor positive biopsy cores). Logistic regression was used to combine the PDE4D5, PDE4D7 and PDE4D9 scores to build a PDE4D5/7/9_BCR regression model. The CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9_BCR risk score used was same as previously published. Results: We investigated three post-surgical outcomes in this study: (i) Adverse Pathology (any ISUP pathological Gleason grade >2, or pathological pT stage > pT3a, or tumor penetrated prostate capsular status, or pN1 disease); (ii) any ISUP pathological Gleason >2; (iii) any ISUP pathological Gleason >1. In the n = 84 patients with low to intermediate clinical risk profiles, the clinical-genomics CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9_BCR risk score was significantly lower in patients with favorable vs. unfavorable outcomes. In univariable logistic regression modeling the genomics PDE4D5/7/9_BCR as well as the clinical-genomics CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9_BCR combination model were significantly associated with all three post-surgical pathology outcomes (p = 0.02, p = 0.0004, p = 0.04; and p = 0.01, p = 0.0002, p = 0.01, respectively). The clinically used PRIAS criteria for the selection of low-risk candidate patients for active surveillance (AS) were not significantly associated with any of the three tested post-operative pathology outcomes (p = 0.3, p = 0.1, p = 0.1, respectively). In multivariable analysis adjusted for the CAPRA score, the genomics PDE4D5/7/9_BCR risk score remained significant for the outcomes of adverse pathology (p = 0.04) and ISUP pathological Gleason >2 (p = 0.004). The negative predictive value of the CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9_BCR risk score using the low-risk cut-off (0.1) for the three pathological endpoints was 82.0%, 100%, and 59.1%, respectively for a selected low-risk cohort of n = 22 patients (26.2% of the entire cohort) compared to 72.1%, 94.4%, and 55.6% for n = 18 low-risk patients (21.4% of the total cohort) selected based on the PRIAS inclusion criteria. Conclusion: In this study, we have shown that the previously reported clinical-genomics prostate cancer risk model CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9_BCR which was developed to predict biological outcomes after surgery of primary prostate cancer is also significantly associated with post-surgical pathology outcomes. The risk score predicts adverse pathology independent of the clinical risk metrics. Compared to clinically used active surveillance inclusion criteria, the clinical-genomics CAPRA&PDE4D5/7/9_BCR risk model selects 22% (n = 8) more low-risk patients with higher negative predictive value to experience unfavorable post-operative pathology outcomes.

Prostate cancer treatment - China's perspective

Prostate cancer (PCa) incidence and mortality have rapidly increased in China. Notably, unique epidemiological characteristics of PCa are found in the Chinese PCa population, including a low but rising incidence and an inferior but improving disease prognosis. Consequently, the current treatment landscape of PCa in China demonstrates distinct features. Establishing a more thorough understanding of the characteristics of Chinese patients may help provide novel insights into potential treatment strategies for PCa patients. Herein, we review the epidemiological status and differences in treatment modalities of Chinese PCa patients. In addition, we discuss the underlying socioeconomic and biological factors that contribute to such diversity and further propose directions for future efforts in optimizing the PCa treatment in China.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Contemporary Selection Criteria in Prostate Cancer Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Several active surveillance (AS) criteria have been established to screen insignificant prostate cancer (insigPCa, defined as organ confined, low grade and small volume tumors confirmed by postoperative pathology). However, their comparative diagnostic performance varies. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contemporary AS criteria and validate the absolute diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of optimal AS criteria.

Methods

First, we searched Pubmed and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contemporary AS criteria and obtained a relative ranking. Then, we searched Pubmed again to perform another meta-analysis to validate the absolute DOR of the top-ranked AS criteria derived from the NMA with two endpoints: insigPCa and favorable disease (defined as organ confined, low grade tumors). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted to identify any potential heterogeneity in the results. Publication bias was evaluated.

Results

Seven eligible retrospective studies with 3,336 participants were identified for the NMA. The diagnostic accuracy of AS criteria ranked from best to worst, was as follows: Epstein Criteria (EC), Yonsei criteria, Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS), University of Miami (UM), University of California-San Francisco (UCSF), Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), and University of Toronto (UT). I² = 50.5%, and sensitivity analysis with different insigPCa definitions supported the robustness of the results. In the subsequent meta-analysis of DOR of EC, insigPCa and favorable disease were identified as endpoints in ten and twenty-two studies, respectively. The pooled DOR for insigPCa and favorable disease were 0.44 (95%CI, 0.31–0.58) and 0.66 (95%CI, 0.61–0.71), respectively. According to a subgroup analysis, the DOR for favorable disease was significantly higher in US institutions than that in other regions. No significant heterogeneity or evidence of publication bias was identified.

Conclusions

Among the seven AS criteria evaluated in this study, EC was optimal for positively identifying insigPCa patients. The pooled diagnostic accuracy of EC was 0.44 for insigPCa and 0.66 when a more liberal endpoint, favorable disease, was used.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], PROSPERO [CRD42020157048].

Risk of adverse pathological features for intermediate risk prostate cancer: Clinical implications for definitive radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

Intermediate risk prostate cancer represents a largely heterogeneous group with diverse disease extent. We sought to establish rates of adverse pathological features important for radiation planning by analyzing surgical specimens from men with intermediate risk prostate cancer who underwent immediate radical prostatectomy, and to define clinical pathologic features that may predict adverse outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1552 men diagnosed with intermediate risk prostate cancer who underwent immediate radical prostatectomy between 1/1/2005 and 12/31/2015 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria included available preoperative PSA level, pathology reports of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, and radical prostatectomy. Incidences of various pathological adverse features were evaluated. Patient characteristics and clinical disease features were analyzed for their predictive values.

RESULTS

Fifty percent of men with high risk features (defined as PSA >10 but <20 or biopsy primary Gleason pattern of 4) had pathological upstage to T3 or higher disease. The incidence of upgrade to Gleason score of 8 or higher and the incidence of lymph node positive disease was low. Biopsy primary Gleason pattern of 4, and PSA greater than 10 but less than 20, affected adverse pathology in addition to age and percent positive biopsy cores. Older age and increased percentage of positive cores were significant risk factors of adverse pathology.

CONCLUSION

Our findings underscore the importance of comprehensive staging beyond PSA level, prostate biopsy, and CT/bone scan for men with intermediate risk prostate cancer proceeding with radiation in the era of highly conformal treatment.

The clinical impact of strict criteria for active surveillance of prostate cancer in Korean population: Results from a prospective cohort

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical impact of strict selection criteria for active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer in a Korean population.

Materials and Methods

A single-center, prospectively collected AS cohort from December 2016 to February 2019 was used. Following pre-determined criteria, patients were categorized into “strict AS” and “non-strict AS” groups. Clinicopathological progression-free survival (PFS) and treatment-free survival (TFS) of the two groups were compared using the Kaplan–Meier curve and log-rank test. Age-adjusted hazard ratios for clinicopathological progression was calculated using Cox proportional regression analysis.

Results

Of 54 eligible patients, 25 and 29 were assigned to “strict AS” and “non-strict AS,” respectively. Clinicopathological progression and definitive treatment rates were 24.0% (6 of 25 patients) vs. 51.7% (15 of 29 patients) and 32.0% (8 of 25 patients) vs. 62.1% (18 of 29 patients) in “strict AS” and “non-strict AS” groups. Progress to high-risk cancer (pathologic T3 or surgical Gleason Grade 2 over) in radical prostatectomy was higher in “non-strict AS” than “strict AS”. PFS (mean 34.6±2.9 mo vs. 22.6±2.7 mo; p=0.025) and TFS (mean 31.8±3.2 mo vs. 19.6±2.4 mo; p=0.018) favor the “strict AS” group than “non-strict AS” group. Age-adjusted hazard ratio for clinicopathological progression of strict criteria was 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.14–0.94; p=0.04).

Conclusions

PFS and TFS were better in the “strict AS” group than in the “non-strict AS” group. This finding should be informed to relevant patients during decision making and considered in Korean guidelines.

The impact of age on pathological insignificant prostate cancer rates in contemporary robot-assisted prostatectomy patients despite active surveillance eligibility

BACKGROUND

To assess insignificant prostate cancer(iPCa) rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in contemporary patients who were preoperatively eligible for active surveillance(AS). IPCa indicates no risk of PCa progression.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 2,837 RARP patients (2010-2019) who fulfilled at least one AS entry criteria set - Prostate Cancer Research International - Active Surveillance(PRIAS), University of California San Francisco(UCSF), National Comprehensive Cancer Network(NCCN) or University of Toronto. We utilized four different iPCa definitions, (1) based on pT2 and Gleason score ≤6 and also cumulative tumor-volume (2) ≤2.5mL, (3) ≤0.7mL or (4) ≤0.5mL. For each AS set we tested the rates of iPCa and compared between age <70 vs. ≥70 yrs. This was complemented by multivariable logistic regression(LRM) predicting iPCa, adjusted for age and clinical AS variables. Finally, within the subgroup, who had iPCa, we tested rate of those, who were deemed preoperatively AS ineligible.

RESULTS

Between most(PRIAS) and least stringent(TORONTO) AS sets, iPCa(1) was correctly predicted in 70-57%. Similarly, for iPCa definitions 2-4, rates were (2)59-42%, (3)34-19% and (4)27-14%. Senior patients harbored decreased proportions of iPCa. LRM confirmed that advanced age is associated with a lower chance of iPCa. More stringent AS sets lead to higher rates of AS ineligibility, e.g. 53% for PRIAS, despite iPCa.

CONCLUSIONS

AS sets show limited accuracy for stricter iPCa definitions, which further declined with advanced age. Greater AS stringency resulted in more AS ineligible patients despite harboring iPCa. In consequence, patients are at risk for overtreatment. Clinicians must consider age and different AS sets that result in highly variable detection rates of iPCa.

Favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer with biopsy Gleason score of 6

BACKGROUND

To identify potential prognostic factors among patients with favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer with a biopsy Gleason score 6.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2019, favorable intermediate risk patients who underwent radical prostatectomy were included in this study. All patients were evaluated preoperatively with MRI. Using PI-RADS scores, patients were divided into two groups, and clinic-pathological outcomes were compared. The impact of preoperative factors on significant pathologic Gleason score upgrading (≥ 4 + 3) and biochemical recurrence were assessed via multivariate analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with PI-RADS ≤ 2.

RESULTS

Among the 239 patients, 116 (48.5%) were MRI-negative (PI-RADS ≤ 3) and 123 (51.5%) were MRI-positive (PI-RADS > 3). Six patients in the MRI-negative group (5.2%) were characterized as requiring significant pathologic Gleason score upgrading compared with 34 patients (27.6%) in the MRI-positive group (p < 0.001). PI-RADS score was shown to be a significant predictor of significant pathologic Gleason score upgrading (OR = 6.246, p < 0.001) and biochemical recurrence (HR = 2.595, p = 0.043). 10-years biochemical recurrence-free survival was estimated to be 84.4% and 72.6% in the MRI-negative and MRI-positive groups (p = 0.035). In the 79 patients with PI-RADS ≤ 2, tumor length in biopsy cores was identified as a significant predictor of pathologic Gleason score (OR = 11.336, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Among the patients with favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer with a biopsy Gleason score 6, preoperative MRI was capable of predicting significant pathologic Gleason score upgrading and biochemical recurrence. Especially, the patients with PI-RADS ≤ 2 and low biopsy tumor length could be a potential candidate to active surveillance.

Clinical outcome comparison of Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 prostate cancer with and without cribriform architecture at the time of radical prostatectomy

Aims

Invasive cribriform and intraductal carcinoma are associated with aggressive disease in Grade Group 2 (GG2) prostate cancer patients. However, the characteristics and clinical outcome of patients with GG2 prostate cancer without cribriform architecture (GG2−) as compared with those with Grade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and pathological characteristics of GG1 and GG2− prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Methods and results

We reviewed 835 radical prostatectomy specimens for Grade Group, pT stage, surgical margin status, and the presence of cribriform architecture. Biochemical recurrence‐free survival and metastasis were used as clinical outcomes. GG1 prostate cancer was seen in 207 patients, and GG2 prostate cancer was seen in 420 patients, of whom 228 (54%) showed cribriform architecture (GG2+) and 192 (46%) did not. GG2− patients had higher prostate‐specific antigen levels (9.4 ng/ml versus 7.0 ng/ml; P < 0.001), more often had extraprostatic extension (36% versus 11%; P < 0.001) and had more positive surgical margins (27% versus 17%; P = 0.01) than GG1 patients. GG2− patients had shorter biochemical recurrence‐free survival (hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.4–4.9; P = 0.002) than GG1 patients. Lymph node and distant metastasis were observed neither in GG2− nor in GG1 patients, but occurred in 22 of 228 (10%) GG2+ patients.

Conclusion

In conclusion, patients with GG2− prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy have more advanced disease and shorter biochemical recurrence‐free survival than those with GG1 prostate cancer, but both groups have a very low risk of developing metastasis.

A single-center long-term experience of active surveillance for prostate cancer: 15 years of follow-up

Purpose

To describe a single-center 15-year experience of active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa).

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent AS between 2003 and 2018. One hundred fifty-three patients were selected according to the following criteria: (1) biopsy Gleason pattern ≤3+4 with (2) ≤two positive core(s) and (3) ≤50% core involvement, clinical-stage ≤T2a, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤20 ng/mL. Follow-up included PSA measurement every six months, prostate biopsies at one year and then every 2–3 years, and MRI every year. Intervention was triggered by (1) Gleason score (GS) upgrading, (2) >two positive cores, or (3) PSA doubling-time in <3 years.

Results

Mean (±standard deviation) follow-up was 36.4 (±31.9) months. Ninety-three (60.8%) and 20 (13.1%) patients received second and third biopsies, respectively. Seventy-two patients (47.1%) discontinued AS for various reasons (59, intervention; 13, follow-up loss). Reasons for intervention consisted of GS upgrading (42.4%), >two positive cores (8.5%), abnormal PSA kinetics (11.9%), and patient preference (37.3%). Notably, 12 (25.5%) patients had pathologic GS ≥4+3 (unfavorable disease) and 3 (6.4%) patients had pathologic stage ≥T3a at radical prostatectomy. Median time to treatment-free survival was 19.5 months. Of the 59 patients who switched to intervention, biochemical recurrence was reported in only one (0.7%) patient.

Conclusions

AS is an available option for low-risk PCa in carefully selected patients. Further larger prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal criteria for AS, especially in Korean PCa patients.

A novel nomogram to identify candidates for active surveillance amongst patients with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 1 or ISUP GG2 prostate cancer, according to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings

OBJECTIVES

To develop a novel nomogram to identify candidates for active surveillance (AS) that combines clinical, biopsy and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) findings; and to compare its predictive accuracy to, respectively: (i) Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria, (ii) Johns Hopkins (JH) criteria, (iii) European Association of Urology (EAU) low-risk classification, and (iv) EAU low-risk or low-volume with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 2 classification.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We selected 1837 patients with ISUP GG1 or GG2 prostate cancer (PCa), treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) between 2012 and 2018. The outcome of interest was the presence of unfavourable disease (i.e., clinically significant PCa [csPCa]) at RP, defined as: ISUP GG ≥ 3 and/or pathological T stage (pT) ≥3a and/or pathological N stage (pN) 1. First, logistic regression models including PRIAS, JH, EAU low-risk, and EAU low-risk or low-volume ISUP GG2 binary classifications (not eligible vs eligible) were used. Second, a multivariable logistic regression model including age, prostate-specific antigen density (PSA-D), ISUP GG, and the percentage of positive cores (Model 1) was fitted. Third, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score (Model 2), extracapsular extension (ECE) score (Model 3) and PI-RADS + ECE score (Model 4) were added to Model 1. Only variables associated with higher csPCa rates in Model 4 were retained in the final simplified Model 5. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration plots and decision curve analyses were used.

RESULTS

Of the 1837 patients, 775 (42.2%) had csPCa at RP. Overall, 837 (47.5%), 986 (53.7%), 348 (18.9%), and 209 (11.4%) patients were eligible for AS according to, respectively, the EAU low-risk, EAU low-risk or low-volume ISUP GG2, PRIAS, and JH criteria. The proportion of csPCa amongst the EAU low-risk, EAU low-risk or low-volume ISUP GG2, PRIAS and JH candidates was, respectively 28.5%, 29.3%, 25.6% and 17.2%. Model 4 and Model 5 (in which only PSA-D, ISUP GG, PI-RADS and ECE score were retained) had a greater AUC (0.84), compared to the four proposed AS criteria (all P < 0.001). The adoption of a 25% nomogram threshold increased the proportion of AS-eligible patients from 18.9% (PRIAS) and 11.4% (JH) to 44.4%. Moreover, the same 25% nomogram threshold resulted in significantly lower estimated risks of csPCa (11.3%), compared to PRIAS (Δ: -14.3%), JH (Δ: -5.9%), EAU low-risk (Δ: -17.2%), and EAU low-risk or low-volume ISUP GG2 classifications (Δ: -18.0%).

CONCLUSION

The novel nomogram combining clinical, biopsy and mpMRI findings was able to increase by ~25% and 35% the absolute frequency of patients suitable for AS, compared to, respectively, the PRIAS or JH criteria. Moreover, this nomogram significantly reduced the estimated frequency of csPCa that would be recommended for AS compared to, respectively, the PRIAS, JH, EAU low-risk, and EAU low-risk or low-volume ISUP GG2 classifications.

Long-term use of 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors is safe and effective in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Although 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors (5ARIs) have been shown to benefit men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS), their long-term safety remains controversial. Our objective is to describe the long-term association of 5ARI use with PCa progression in men on AS.

MATERIALS/SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The cohort of men with low-risk PCa was derived from a prospectively maintained AS database at the Princess Margaret (1995-2016). Pathologic, grade, and volume progression were the primary end points. Kaplan-Meier time-to-event analysis was performed and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine predictors of progression where 5ARI exposure was analyzed as a time-dependent variable. Patients who came off AS prior to any progression events were censored at that time.

RESULTS

The cohort included 288 men with median follow-up of 82 months (interquartile range: 37-120 months). Among non-5ARI users (n = 203); 114 men (56.2%) experienced pathologic progression compared with 24 men (28.2%) in the 5ARI group (n = 85), (p < 0.001). Grade and volume progression were higher in the non-5ARI group compared with the 5ARI group (n = 82; 40.4% vs. n = 19; 22.4% respectively, p = 0.003 for grade progression; n = 87; 43.1% and n = 15; 17.7%, respectively for volume progression p < 0.001). Lack of 5ARI use was independently positively associated with pathologic progression (HR: 2.65; CI: 1.65-4.24), grade progression (HR: 2.75; CI: 1.49-5.06), and volume progression (HR: 3.15; CI: 1.78-5.56). The frequency of progression to high-grade (Grade Group 4-5) tumors was not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of 5ARIs diminished both grade and volume progression without an increased risk of developing Grade Groups 4-5 disease.

Determining Clinically Based Factors Associated With Reclassification in the Pre-MRI Era using a Large Prospective Active Surveillance Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To report biopsy-related and oncologic outcomes in a large prospective active surveillance cohort that was initiated in the premagnetic resonance imaging era and to additionally identify clinical factors associated with disease reclassification in order to inform future studies designed to improve enrollment and follow-up on active surveillance.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively enrolled at a single institution from 2006 to 2014 and followed until 2016. Men with Gleason 6 or 7 disease were eligible, and those with >6 months follow-up were included in the analysis. Patients were risk stratified based on clinical/pathologic criteria, including based on a combination of baseline and confirmatory biopsy tumor characteristics. Reclassification-free survival, based on tumor volume increase or Gleason score increase, was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Of 825 enrolled patients, 682 met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 40 months (range 6.6-126.8). Disease was reclassified in 249 (36.5%), and 157 (23.0%) underwent treatment. A single positive core with a negative confirmatory biopsy was significantly associated with time to reclassification (median not met vs 43 months, log rank test P <.001). Composite tumor length, defined as the combined tumor length between baseline and confirmatory biopsies, was associated with shorter Gleason upgrade-free survival (hazard ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.40, P <.001) in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Baseline stratification using clinical factors including tumor length may refine risk stratification and offer the foundation on which new systems that incorporate modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging may be based.

Utility of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With PI-RADS, Version 2, in Patients With Prostate Cancer Eligible for Active Surveillance: Which Radiologic Characteristics Can Predict Unfavorable Disease?

BACKGROUND

We investigated the utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADSv2), scoring in patients with prostate cancer eligible for active surveillance (AS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of the patients who had undergone mpMRI before radical prostatectomy from 2014 to 2018 were reviewed. All the patients had met the Prostate Cancer Research International AS criteria. PI-RADSv2 scores were assigned to 12 prostate regions. Unfavorable disease was stratified using the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) prognostic scale as stage IIB (Gleason score [GS], 3+4 and pathologic stage T2) and IIC-III (GS, ≥ 4+3 or pathologic stage T3).

RESULTS

Of 376 eligible patients, 184 (48.9%), 129 (34.3%), and 63 (16.8%) had AJCC stage I, IIB, and IIC-III disease, respectively. The patients with IIC-III disease were older and had a higher prostate-specific antigen density than those with stage I or IIB disease. PI-RADS 5 lesions were more frequent in patients with stage IIC-III than in patients with stage I or IIB disease. Multivariable analysis revealed that ≥ 2 lesions with a PI-RADS 5 score was an independent predictor for unfavorable disease (hazard ratio [HR], 3.612; P < .001 for IIB; HR, 6.562; P < .001 for IIC-III), and PI-RADS score of ≥ 4 was limited for predicting AJCC stage IIB disease (HR, 2.387; P = .01).

CONCLUSION

mpMRI with PI-RADSv2 showed high negative predictive value for patients with prostate cancer eligible for AS. Multiple PI-RADS 4-5 lesions were associated with unfavorable disease compared with solitary lesions. Multiple PI-RADS 5 lesions were strongly associated with GS ≥ 4+3 or pathologic T3 disease. Targeted biopsy or radical treatment should be considered for these patients.

MRI to guide biopsies or avoid biopsies?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss contemporary data on the value of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) for guiding the decision to biopsy men at risk for prostate cancer, as well as its utility in active surveillance programs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although a systematic 12-core biopsy is the current standard of care for men with increased suspicion for prostate cancer, MRI with or without targeted biopsy has been shown to reliably improve the detection of clinically significant disease following a prior negative biopsy. At the same time, there is a growing body of evidence to support the use of MRI for diagnostic purposes in biopsy-naive patients, as well for enrolling and monitoring men on active surveillance programs.

SUMMARY

mpMRI is an evolving technology with great promise for altering our approach to prostate cancer diagnosis and surveillance. In conjunction with targeted biopsies, MRI offers greater specificity for the detection of clinically significant cancer and therefore may help to reduce overdetection of indolent disease while minimizing the risks and limitations of systematic biopsies.

Older Age at Diagnosis and Initial Disease Volume Predict Grade Reclassification Risk on Confirmatory Biopsy in Patients Considered for Active Surveillance

OBJECTIVE

To identify which active surveillance candidates benefit most from confirmatory biopsies to exclude grade underclassification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This observational study includes 556 men diagnosed between 2002 and 2015 with Gleason 3 + 3 (GG1) disease on initial diagnostic biopsy, of whom 406 received a confirmatory biopsy within 12 months for active surveillance. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine clinicopathologic features associated with Gleason 7 or higher (GG2+) on a confirmatory biopsy. Regression tree analysis was employed to stratify patients into select risk groups.

RESULTS

Eighty-five of 406 patients (20.9%) with initially GG1 disease were reclassified to GG2+ on a confirmatory biopsy. On multivariable analysis, increasing age (per year odds ratio 1.07; 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.12; P <.01) and more positive cores at diagnosis (per core, odds ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.72; P <.01) were significantly associated with reclassification, independent of prostate volume, clinical stage, initial PSA, or confirmatory biopsy type (including magnetic resonance imaging-targeted approaches or transrectal saturation random sampling). Recursive partitioning demonstrated that age over 73 and 5 or more positive cores were factors associated with the greatest reclassification risk.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, both advancing age and additional positive cores were associated with increased odds of reclassification to GG2+ on confirmatory biopsy. In men over age 73 or with 5 or more positive cores, a repeat biopsy within 12 months may be particularly beneficial to minimize tumor grade underclassification.

Current Treatment for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer in China: A National Network Survey

Objective: To analyze the current treatment for low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) in China.

Methods: A national questionnaire survey titled “A survey of current treatment of LRPC” was designed and released nationally through the network from July 16 to August 3, 2017.

Results: A total of 1,116 valid questionnaires were recovered. The percentages of preferred treatment by active surveillance (AS) or radical prostatectomy (RP) were 29.21% and 45.61%, respectively. A correspondence analysis showed that the physician in charge was more inclined to choose AS than RP. Respondents from different institution types, hospitals with different annual numbers of newly admitted patients with prostate cancer, and with different familiarity with the LRPC definition presented a significant difference in the preferred treatments (p < 0.05). Urologists chose AS or not for the following reasons: tumor progression (52.51%), potential medical disputes (42.56%) (i.e., medical disputes from patients or their relatives when urologists choose AS to treat patients with LRPC and the patient has a poor outcome), fear of cancer (41.94%), and surgical risk (39.07%). These reasons were ubiquitous, and there was no significant difference among urologists for these concerns (p > 0.05). Personal skills, surgical risk, and tumor progression were the most common factors that influenced whether AS or RP was preferred (p < 0.05). Concern about the medical disputes brought about by AS was a key factor for not choosing AS (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: LRPC is still dominated by RP in China, followed by AS. Personal skills, surgical risk, and concern about tumor progression were the common factors influencing whether AS or RP was preferred. In addition, medical disputes brought by AS are another key factor for not choosing AS. There will be more Chinese data in the future to guide treatment of LRPC.

Evidence-based approach to active surveillance of prostate cancer

Active surveillance is a good management option for some men with non-metastatic prostate cancer. In this review, we examine the evidence for several topics related to active surveillance. We examine: (1) which patients should be eligible for active surveillance, (2) what follow-up (monitoring) protocols should be used for men on surveillance, (3) what is the role of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for men on surveillance, and (4) what is the prognosis for men who choose surveillance compared to radical treatment. In many instances, the evidence is evolving or lacking. In these situations, we highlight the limitations of the data.

Development and validation of a novel risk score for the detection of insignificant prostate cancer in unscreened patient cohorts

Background

Active surveillance is recommended for insignificant prostate cancer (PCa). Tools exist to identify suitable candidates using clinical variables. We aimed to develop and validate a novel risk score (NRS) predicting which patients are harbouring insignificant PCa.

Methods

We used prospectively collected data from 8040 consecutive unscreened patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2006 and 2016. Of these, data from 2799 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 on biopsy were used to develop a multivariate model predicting the presence of insignificant PC at radical prostatectomy (ERSPC updated definition³: Gleason 3 + 3 only, index tumour volume < 1.3 cm³ and total tumour volume < 2.5 cm³). This was used to develop a novel risk score (NRS) which was validated in an equivalent independent cohort (n = 441). We compared the accuracy of existing predictive tools and the NRS in these cohorts.

Results

The NRS (incorporating PSA, prostate volume, age, clinical T Stage, percent and number of positive biopsy cores) outperformed pre-existing predictive tools in derivation and validation cohorts (AUC 0.755 and 0.76, respectively). Selection bias due to analysis of a surgical cohort is acknowledged.

Conclusions

The advantage of the NRS is that it can be tailored to patient characteristics and may prove to be valuable tool in clinical decision-making.

The role of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score in Gleason 3 + 3 active surveillance candidates enrollment: a diagnostic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The contemporary active surveillance (AS) criteria may result in an unsatisfactory misclassification rate, which may delay curative treatment for prostate cancer patients. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), not included in any AS criteria, provides useful information for prostate cancer diagnosis. Our goal is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (PI-RADS) score, a standardized MRI reporting system, in AS candidates enrollment.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, and Embase for pertinent studies through June 2018. The standard methods recommended for meta-analyses of diagnostic evaluation were employed. We draw the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. Meta-regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effects of confounding factors.

RESULTS

From the resulting 168 studies, 5 provided the diagnostic data on PI-RADS score and pathological results; 834 patients were included. All AS candidates in these studies were defined by Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criterion. The pooled estimates of PI-RADS 4 or 5 on adverse pathological features at radical prostatectomy (RP) among AS candidates were: sensitivity, 0.77 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71-0.82); specificity, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.55-0.71); positive predictive value, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.79); negative predictive value, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.63-0.73); and diagnostic odds ratio, 6 (95% CI, 4-8). The SROC curve was positioned toward the desired upper left corner of the curve, the area under the curve was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73-0.80). The P-value for heterogeneity was <0.01. The pathological outcomes and endorectal coils contributed to the heterogeneity of sensitivity. The evidences supporting the advantage of PI-RADS v2 over v1 were not sufficient yet.

CONCLUSION

AS candidates with PI-RADS 4 or 5 may be unsuitable for AS even though they fulfill current AS criteria. Those with PI-RADS 3 or less indicated relative safety for AS enrollment.

Effects of age and comorbidity on survival vary according to risk grouping among patients with prostate cancer treated using radical prostatectomy: A retrospective competing-risk analysis from the K-CaP registry

A multicenter Korean Prostate Cancer Database (K-CaP) has been established to provide information regarding Korean patients with prostate cancer (PCa). We used the K-CaP registry to investigate the value of age and comorbidity for predicting cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) according to risk grouping.The K-CaP registry includes 2253 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between May 2001 and April 2013 at 5 institutions. Preoperative clinicopathologic data were collected and stratified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk criteria. Survival was evaluated using Gray's modified log-rank test according to risk category, age (<70 years vs ≥70 years), and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (0 vs ≥1).The median follow-up was 55.0 months (interquartile range: 42.0-70.0 months). Competing-risk regression analysis revealed that, independent of CCI, ≥70-year-old high-risk patients had significantly greater CSM than <70-year-old high-risk patients (P = .019). However, <70-year-old high-risk patients with a CCI of ≥1 had similar CSM relative to ≥70-year-old patients. Survival was not affected by age or CCI among low-risk or intermediate-risk patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that a CCI of ≥1 was independently associated with a higher risk of CSM (P = .003), while an age of ≥70 years was independently associated with a higher risk of OCM (P = .005).Age and comorbidity were associated with survival after RP among patients with high-risk PCa, although these associations were not observed among low-risk or intermediate-risk patients. Therefore, older patients with high-risk diseases and greater comorbidity may require alternative multidisciplinary treatment.

Active surveillance review: contemporary selection criteria, follow-up, compliance and outcomes

The primary goal of active surveillance (AS) is to prevent overtreatment by selecting patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) and closely monitoring them so that definitive treatment can be offered when needed. With the increasing popularity of AS as a management strategy for men with localized PCa, it is important to understand all the contemporary guidelines and criteria that exist for AS and the differences among them. No single optimal management strategy for clinically localized, early-stage disease has been universally accepted. The implementation of AS varies widely between institutions, from inclusion criteria to follow-up protocols, with the most notable differences seen in maximum accepted Gleason score, T-stage and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) parameters. The objectives of this review were to systematically summarize the current literature on AS strategy, present an overview of the various published guidelines and criteria that are used for AS at several major institutions as well as discuss goals and trade-offs of the various criteria. A comprehensive search of the PubMed and Embase databases from 1990 to 2017 was performed to identify studies pertaining to AS criteria and trends. Trends in AS uptake and use in Canada, USA and Europe were reviewed to demonstrate the current trends and outcomes of AS to offer greater insight into the differences, nature and efficacy of various AS protocols. AS is a compelling antidote to the current PCa overtreatment phenomena; however, when considering patients for AS it is important to understand the differences between protocols, and review published results to appreciate the impact on follow-up.

Is prostate specific antigen (PSA) density necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance and what should be the cutoff in the Asian population?

Background

To investigate the role of Prostate Specific Antigen density (PSAD) in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance (AS) and to determine a cutoff PSAD in identifying adverse pathological outcomes.

Methods

Data from 287 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Six different AS protocols, the University of Toronto; Royal Marsden; John Hopkins; University of California San Francisco (UCSF); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS), were applied to the cohort. Pre-operative demographics and pathological outcomes were analysed. Statistical analyses on the predictive factors of adverse pathological outcomes and significance of PSAD were performed. A cutoff PSAD with best balance between sensitivity and specificity in identifying adverse pathological outcome was determined.

Results

PSAD predicted adverse pathological outcomes better than Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) level alone. The PSAD was significantly lower (0.12-0.13 ng/dl/ml) in protocols including PSAD (the John Hopkins and PRIAS) compared with the other four protocols not including PSAD as a selection criteria (0.21-0.25 ng/dl/dl, P = 0.00). PSAD predicted adverse pathological outcomes in all protocols not incorporating PSAD as an inclusion criteria (P = 0.00-0.02). By the receiver operator characteristics curve analysis, it was found that a PSAD level of 0.19 ng/ml/ml had the best balance between sensitivity and specificity in predicting pathological adverse disease (Area under curve = 0.63, P = 0.004).

Conclusion

PSAD is necessary in selecting prostate cancer patients for active surveillance. It predicts adverse pathological outcomes in patients eligible for active surveillance better than PSA level alone. A PSAD cutoff at 0.19 ng/ml/ml has the best balance between sensitivity and specificity in predicting pathological adverse disease. We recommend using AS protocol incorporating PSAD as a selection criteria (in particular the PRIAS protocol with a cutoff PSAD at 0.2 ng/ml/ml) when recruiting prostate cancer patients for AS.

Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. Part I: Risk Stratification, Shared Decision Making, and Care Options

PURPOSE

This guideline is structured to provide a clinical framework stratified by cancer severity to facilitate care decisions and guide the specifics of implementing the selected management options. The summary presented represents Part I of the two-part series dedicated to Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline discussing risk stratification and care options by cancer severity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The systematic review utilized in the creation of this guideline was completed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and through additional supplementation by ECRI Institute. This review included articles published between January 2007 and March 2014 with an update search conducted through August 2016. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence for a particular treatment was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate), or C (low) for support of Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendations. Additional information is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions (table 2 in supplementary unabridged guideline, http://jurology.com/).

RESULTS

The AUA (American Urological Association), ASTRO, and SUO (Society of Urologic Oncology) formulated an evidence-based guideline based on a risk stratified clinical framework for the management of localized prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to treat patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, but higher quality evidence in future trials will be essential to improve the level of care for these patients. In all cases, patient preferences should be considered when choosing a management strategy.

PI-RADS v2 and periprostatic fat measured on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can predict upgrading in radical prostatectomy pathology amongst patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer

PURPOSE

An underestimated biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 can result in unfounded optimism amongst patients and cause physicians to miss the window for prostate cancer (PCa) cure. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 as well as periprostatic fat (PPF) measured on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) at predicting pathological upgrading amongst patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 56 patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 PCa who underwent prebiopsy mp-MRI and radical prostatectomy (RP) between November 2013 and March 2018 was conducted. Two radiologists performed PI-RADS v2 score evaluation and different fat measurements on mp-MRI. The associations amongst clinical information, PI-RADS v2 score, different fat parameters and pathologic findings were analyzed. A nomogram predicting upgrading was established based on the results of logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 38 (67.9%) patients were upgraded to Gleason ≥7 disease on RP specimens. Prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) (p < .001), positive core (p < .001), single-core positivity (p = .039), PI-RADS score (p < .001), front PPF area (p = .007) and front-to-total ratio (the ratio of front PPF area to total contour area) (p < .001) were risk factors for upgrading. On multivariate analysis, Epstein criteria (p = .02), PI-RADS score >3 (p = .024), and front-to-total ratio (p = .006) were independent risk factors for pathologic upgrading. The AUC value of the nomogram was 0.893 (95% CI, 0.787-0.999).

CONCLUSION

The combination of PI-RADS v2 and periprostatic fat measured on mp-MRI can help predict pathologic upgrading amongst patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 PCa.

Preoperative prostate health index predicts poor pathologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy in patients with biopsy-detected low-risk patients prostate cancer: results from a Chinese prospective cohort

OBJECTIVE

To determine the performance of the prostate health index (PHI) in predicting pathologic outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) in Chinese patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

Of all consecutive patients who underwent RP in one tertiary center from September 2013 to January 2017, we prospectively examined the data of 140 patients with low-risk PCa based on the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria. All patients were eligible for active surveillance, but underwent RP. Clinical and pathological data were collected. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the associations between the PHI and outcome of RP. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the accuracy of different models. Decision curve analysis was used to evaluate the potential clinical usefulness of making model-based decisions.

RESULTS

Only 44 (31.4%) patients were finally confirmed to have organ-confined Gleason ≤6 PCa. A low PHI was significantly predictive of organ-confined Gleason ≤6 PCa (p = 0.001), while tPSA and f/tPSA were not associated with final pathology. In the multivariate analyses, addition of the PHI significantly increased the predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.767, 95% Cl 0.685-0.849, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The PRIAS criteria for active surveillance may not suitable for Chinese patients with PCa. Addition of the PHI to the PRIAS models improved the prognostic performance. If confirmed in future larger and multicenter studies, PHI may help us to identify patients eligible for AS in China.

Pathological and oncological features of Korean prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance: analysis from the K-CaP registry

Background

A web-based multicenter Korean Prostate Cancer Database (K-CaP) was established to provide urologists with information on Korean prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). We utilized the K-CaP registry to identify pathological features and oncological outcomes of Korean PCa patients eligible for active surveillance (AS).

Methods

The K-CaP registry consisted of 6415 patients who underwent RP from May 2001 to April 2013 at five institutions. Preoperative clinicopathological data were collected to identify patients who were eligible for at least one contemporary AS protocol. Patients who had received neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy or a 5α-reductase inhibitor, who had <10 total biopsy cores, or who had incomplete data were excluded. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥0.2 ng/ml following RP.

Results

A total of 560 patients were identified, and the median follow-up period was 52.0 (interquartile range, 39.0-67.3) months. Pathologically insignificant PCa, defined as organ-confined disease with Gleason score ≤6 was observed in 314 (56.1%) patients. Pathological upgrading (Gleason score ≥7) and upstaging (≥pT3) were observed in 237 (42.3%) and 75 (13.4%) patients, respectively. Unfavorable disease (extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, or Gleason score ≥8) was observed in 85 (15.2%) patients. PSA density ≤0.2 ng/ml/cc and maximal single core involvement ≤20% were revealed as independent preoperative predictors of pathologically insignificant PCa.

Conclusion

Contemporary Western AS protocols unreliably predict pathologically insignificant PCa in Korean men. Korean men may harbor more aggressive PCa features than Western men, and thus, a more stringent AS protocol is needed.

Clinically insignificant prostate cancer suitable for active surveillance according to Prostate Cancer Research International: Active surveillance criteria: Utility of PI-RADS v2

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) is an important treatment strategy for prostate cancer (PCa). Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 has been addressed, but few studies have reported the value of PI-RADS v2 for assessing risk stratification in patients with PCa, especially on selecting potential candidates for AS.

PURPOSE

To investigate the utility of PI-RADS v2 and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in evaluating patients with insignificant PCa, who are suitable for AS.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

SUBJECTS

In all, 238 patients with PCa who met the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance criteria underwent radical prostatectomy.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

3.0T, including T₂ -weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging.

ASSESSMENT

Insignificant cancer was defined histopathologically as an organ-confined disease with a tumor volume <0.5 cm³ without Gleason score 4-5. Patients were divided into two groups based on the PI-RADS v2 and tumor ADC: A, PI-RADS score ≤3 and ADC ≥1.095 × 10^-3 mm² /s; and B, PI-RADS score 4-5 or ADC <1.095 × 10^-3 mm² /s. Preoperative clinical and imaging variables were evaluated regarding the associations with insignificant cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 238 patients, 101 (42.8%) were diagnosed with insignificant cancer on pathological findings. The number of positive cores, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), PI-RADS v2 and tumor ADC were significantly associated with insignificant cancer on univariate analysis (P < 0.05). However, multivariate analysis indicated tumor ADC (odds ratio [OR] = 4.57, P < 0.001) and PI-RADS v2 (OR = 3.60, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of insignificant cancer. Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) reached 0.803 when PI-RADS v2 (AUC = 0.747) was combined with tumor ADC (AUC = 0.786).

DATA CONCLUSION

The PI-RADS v2 together with tumor ADC may be a useful marker for predicting patients with insignificant PCa when considering AS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1072-1079.

Can you un-ring the bell? A qualitative study of how affect influences cancer screening decisions

BACKGROUND

The belief that early detection is the best protection against cancer underlies cancer screening. Emerging research now suggests harms associated with early detection may sometimes outweigh the benefits. Governments, cancer agencies, and organizations that publish screening guidelines have found it is difficult to "un-ring the bell" on the message that "early detection is your best protection" because of its widespread communication and enduring resonance. This study explores affective factors-and their interplay with relevant analytical factors-in public/laypersons' decision making about cancer screening.

METHODS

A total of 93 people (47 men, 46 women) attended focus groups about, respectively, prostate cancer screening and breast cancer screening in two Canadian cities.

RESULTS

Affective factors were a major influence on many focus group participants' decision making about cancer screening, including fear of cancer and a generalized enthusiasm for prevention/screening, and they were often inspired by anecdotes about the cancer experiences of family and friends. Affect also existed alongside more analytical factors including assessments of reduced risk in the management of any cancer diagnosis if caught early, and, for men, the belief that an unreliable test is "better than nothing," and that men deserve prostate cancer screening because women have breast and cervical cancer screening. Affective factors were particularly noticeable in the sub-groups most supportive of screening and the "early detection" message: older women who felt that mammogram screening should begin at age 40 rather than 50, and older men who felt that prostate cancer screening should be expanded beyond its current unorganized, opportunistic usage. In contrast, younger participants displayed less affective attachments to "early detection" messages and had greater concerns about harms of screening and were more receptive to nuanced messages informed by evidence.

CONCLUSION

Policymakers attempting to communicate more nuanced versions of the "early detection" message need to understand the role of affect alongside other judgments brought into laypersons' decision making processes and anticipate how affective responses to their messages will be shaped, transformed, and potentially subverted by external forces beyond their control. Particularly overt external factors are campaigns by cancer advocacy organizations actively promoting breast and prostate cancer awareness and screening to younger women and men using affectively-charged messages.

Comparison of 11 Active Surveillance Protocols in Contemporary European Men Treated With Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare 11 active surveillance (AS) protocols in contemporary European men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Martini-Clinic Prostate Cancer Center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Analyzed were 3498 RP patients, from 2005 to 2016, who underwent ≥ 10 core biopsies and fulfilled at least 1 of 11 examined AS entry definitions. We tested proportions of AS eligibility, ineligibility, presence of primary Gleason 4/5, upstage, and combinations thereof at RP, as well as 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS).

RESULTS

The most and least stringent criteria were very low risk National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Royal Marsden with 18.8% and 96.1% of AS-eligible patients, respectively. Rates of primary Gleason 4/5 at RP, upstaging, or both features, respectively, ranged from 2.3% to 6.7%, 6.1% to 18.2%, and 7.1% to 21.0% for those 2 AS entry definitions. The range of individuals deemed AS-ineligible between the same 2 AS entry definitions, despite not harboring unfavorable pathology (primary Gleason pattern 4/5, upstage, or both), was 80.3% to 3.7%, 78.3% to 3.4%, and 77.8% to 3.4%, respectively. BFS rates showed narrow variability, with a range of 85.9% to 91.8%.

CONCLUSION

Use of stringent AS entry definitions reduces the number of AS-eligible patients, which is related to a select range in individual entry parameters. Moreover, rates of unfavorable pathology at RP as much as tripled between most and least stringent AS entry definitions. However, less stringent AS entry definitions result in the lowest AS-ineligibility rates, in men without unfavorable pathology. BFS rates were virtually invariably high. Clinicians should know differences in key parameters underlying each AS entry definition, associated effect on rates of eligibility, and potential misclassification of individuals.

An assessment of Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria for active surveillance of clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance is a strategy to delay or prevent treatment of indolent prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria were developed to select patients for prostate cancer active surveillance. The objective of this study was to compare pathological findings from PRIAS-eligible and PRIAS-ineligible clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

A D'Amico low-risk cohort of 1512 radical prostatectomy patients treated at The Ottawa Hospital or Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre between January 1995 and December 2007 was reviewed. Pathological outcomes (pT3 tumours, Gleason sum ≥7, lymph node metastases, or a composite) and clinical outcomes (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] recurrence, secondary cancer treatments, and death) were compared between PRIAS-eligible and PRIAS-ineligible cohorts.

RESULTS

The PRIAS-eligible cohort (n=945) was less likely to have Gleason score ≥7 (odds ratio [OR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.75), pT3 (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.31-0.55), nodal metastases (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.10-1.31), or any adverse feature (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.45-0.69) compared to the PRIAS-ineligible cohort. The probability of any adverse pathology in the PRIAS-eligible cohort was 41% vs. 56% in the PRIAS-ineligible cohort. At median follow-up of 3.7 years, 72 (4.8%) patients had a PSA recurrence, 24 (1.6%) received pelvic radiation, and 13 (0.9%) received androgen deprivation. No difference was detected for recurrence-free and overall survival between groups (recurrence hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; 95% CI 0.46-1.09 and survival HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.36-1.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-risk prostate cancer patients who met PRIAS eligibility criteria are less likely to have higher-risk cancer compared to those who did not meet at least one of these criteria.

Is suspicious upstaging on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging useful in improving the reliability of Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria? Use of the K-CaP registry

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical effects of suspicious upstaging on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for improving the quality of Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 363 patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) were selected from the K-CaP registry (the multicenter Korean PCa Database). Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the results of mpMRI (with or without suspicious upstaging). The variables for predicting significant PCa, defined as locally advanced PCa, Gleason score≥7, or tumor volume>0.5cc or all of these, and adverse PCa, defined as locally advanced PCa, Gleason score≥7 (4+3), or tumor volume>2.5cc or all of these, were assessed.

RESULTS

The mpMRI led to "suspicious" upstaging in 56 patients (15.4%). Significant PCa (98.2% vs. 74.6%, P<0.001) and adverse PCa (85.7% vs. 32.6%, P<0.001) were more common in patients with suspicious upstaging. The sensitivity/specificity of mpMRI for significant PCa and adverse PCa were 25.4%/98.2% and 32.4%/96.3%, respectively. On multivariate analyses, suspicious upstaging on mpMRI (odds ratio: 15.82, P = 0.007) was a predictor for significant PCa in addition to PRIAS criteria and age at diagnosis. In addition, suspicious upstaging on mpMRI (odds ratio: 11.11, P<0.001) was a significant predictor for adverse PCa in addition to PRIAS criteria, age at diagnosis, and body mass index.

CONCLUSION

Along with the PRIAS criteria, suspicious upstaging on mpMRI is a potent diagnostic tool for distinguishing patients suitable for active surveillance among patients with low-risk PCa.

Biopsy Perineural Invasion in Prostate Cancer Patients Who Are Candidates for Active Surveillance by Strict and Expanded Criteria

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of biopsy perineural invasion (PNI) with adverse pathologic findings on radical prostatectomy in patients who would have been candidates for active surveillance (AS).

METHODS

Using a prospectively populated database of 3084 men who underwent open radical prostatectomy, candidates for AS by strict (Johns Hopkins) and expanded (University of Toronto) criteria were identified. The presence of adverse pathologic features at radical prostatectomy was compared between those men with and without biopsy PNI.

RESULTS

Of 596 men who met strict criteria for AS, 16 (3%) had biopsy PNI. In the strict AS cohort, there were no differences in adverse pathologic features at radical prostatectomy between those with and without PNI. Of 1197 men who were candidates for AS by expanded criteria, 102 (9%) had biopsy PNI. Men with biopsy PNI in the expanded AS cohort were more likely to have extraprostatic extension (P < .001) and pathologic upgrading (P = .01) at prostatectomy. In addition, those with PNI had larger dominant nodules (P < .001), and cancer comprised a greater percentage of their prostate glands (P < .001). There was no difference in the proportion with a positive margin between the 2 groups (P = .77).

CONCLUSION

Biopsy PNI was rare in patients who met strict criteria for AS. Among those men who met expanded criteria, PNI was associated with adverse pathologic findings upon prostatectomy. The presence of biopsy PNI may have a role in further risk stratifying patients who meet expanded criteria for AS.

Integration of multiparametric MRI into active surveillance of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common noncutaneous cancer in men though many men will not die of this disease and may not require definitive treatment. Active surveillance (AS) is an increasingly utilized potential solution to the issue of overtreatment of prostate cancer. Traditionally, prostate cancer patients have been stratified into risk groups based on clinical stage on digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen and biopsy Gleason score, though each of these variables has significant limitations. This review will discuss the potential role for prostate multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsy techniques incorporating MRI in the selection of candidates for AS, monitoring patients on AS and as triggers for definitive treatment.

Using Electronic Health Record Data to Identify Prostate Cancer Patients That May Qualify for Active Surveillance

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of the protein-specific antigen (PSA) test in care means that prostate cancer (PCa) is being detected earlier and more frequently. The result of increased screening using PSA, digital rectal examination and awareness of prostate was an increase in the number of men with low risk cancers. Active surveillance has become a viable alternative to immediate treatment with surgery, radiation and other forms of localized treatment. Evidence suggests that there is no significant difference in mortality rates between AS and surgery. In addition, patients may potentially delay other complications associated with surgery, radiation or deprivation therapy.

METHODS

This quality improvement study using a delivery system science framework describes the electronic identification of AS candidates given an evidence-based identification criteria based upon national guidelines and clinical judgement. The study population (n=649) was drawn from health records of all patients who received a prostate biopsy (n=1731) at Intermountain Healthcare from 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2014. Automated and manual abstraction was performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to compare AS-eligible patients to the actual treatment received to identify potential care improvement opportunities. Among those with complete data, 24.7% of this population (n=160) met "AS-eligible" criteria. 39.1% of the population had not received surgery, radiation or androgen deprivation therapy and were considered as being treated using an AS approach. 9% of AS-eligible patients did not receive AS; 27% of patients who did not meet AS-eligible criteria received AS. Estimated guideline adherence measured using area under the curve was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.66-0.73). Modest variation in criteria parameters for identifying AS-eligible patients did not significantly change estimated adherence levels.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of evidence-based criteria for detection of AS candidates is feasible using electronic health record data and provides a reasonable basis for delivery system evaluation of practice patterns and for quality improvement.

Primary Gleason pattern upgrading in contemporary patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer: implications for future biomarkers and imaging modalities

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively assess the rate of high-grade primary Gleason upgrading (HGPGU) to primary Gleason pattern 4 or 5 in a contemporary cohort of patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer including those who fulfilled Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria, and to develop a tool for HGPGU prediction. HGPGU is a contraindication in most active surveillance (AS) and focal therapy protocols.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 10 616 patients with localised prostate cancer were treated at a high-volume European tertiary care centre from 2010 to 2015 with radical prostatectomy. Analyses were restricted to 1 819 patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer (17.1%) with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of <10.0 ng/mL, cT1c-cT2a and Gleason score ≤6, and were repeated within 772 of the men (7.3%) who fulfilled the PRIAS criteria for AS (PSA level of ≤10 ng/mL, T1c-T2, Gleason score ≤6, PSA density (PSAD) of <0.2 ng/mL² , ≤2 positive cores). Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted, testing predictors of HGPGU. The final logistic regression model was based on the most informative variables.

RESULTS

There was HGPGU in 88 (4.8%) patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer and in 32 (4.1%) of the subgroup who were PRIAS eligible. Multivariable analysis predicting HGPGU for the patients with D'Amico low-risk yielded three independent predictors: age, PSAD, and clinical tumour stage (P = 0.008, P = 0.005 and P = 0.021, respectively). Within the same patients, the model using all vs the most informative variables resulted in area under the curves (AUCs) of 69.2% and 68.3%, respectively. Multivariable analysis of those who were PRIAS eligible, yielded age and number of positive cores as independent predictors of HGPGU (P = 0.002 and P = 0.049, respectively; AUC 64.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

The low accuracy (invariably <70%) for HGPGU prediction in both patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer and PRIAS eligibility indicates that these variables have poor predictive ability in contemporary patients. Despite HGPGU being a rare phenomenon, it may have life threatening implications and consequently alternatives such as biomarkers, genetic markers, or imaging modalities at re-biopsy are needed.

Stricter Active Surveillance Criteria for Prostate Cancer do Not Result in Significantly Better Outcomes: A Comparison of Contemporary Protocols

PURPOSE

We reviewed various existing active surveillance criteria and determined the competing trade-offs of the stricter vs more inclusive active surveillance criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Men enrolled in an active surveillance program at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between 1998 and 2014 were identified through a prospectively maintained database. All patients were assessed for entry eligibility into the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance, Johns Hopkins, University of Miami, University of California San Francisco, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, University of Toronto-Sunnybrook and Royal Marsden protocols. The 2-sided t-test, ANOVA, Wilcoxon rank sum or chi-square tests were used for comparison as appropriate.

RESULTS

Of the 1,365 men identified 1,085 met the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre inclusion criteria. When the Johns Hopkins, Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance and University of Miami criteria were applied 15.2%, 11.5% and 11.3% of these patients were excluded from active surveillance, respectively. No significant differences were noted between men who met the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre criteria and those who were excluded based on more stringent criteria when grade or volume reclassification was compared. No significant differences in prostate specific antigen velocity or the number of patients who proceeded to seek treatment were noted (p >0.1). Rates of biochemical recurrence among patients who chose to undergo radical prostatectomy after initial active surveillance were not different between men who met the more inclusive vs more exclusive active surveillance protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

More selective criteria do not significantly improve short-term outcomes when considering the relative risk of grade reclassification or biochemical failure after treatment. In an era of increased awareness regarding the over diagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer, we believe that stricter entry criteria should be reconsidered.

Extreme Gleason Upgrading From Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy: A Population-based Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the risk factors associated with the odds of extreme Gleason upgrading at radical prostatectomy (RP) (defined as a Gleason prognostic group score increase of ≥2), we utilized a large, population-based cancer registry.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiologic, and End Results database was queried (2010-2011) for all patients diagnosed with Gleason 3 + 3 or 3 + 4 on prostate needle biopsy. Available clinicopathologic factors and the odds of upgrading and extreme upgrading at RP were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 12,459 patients were identified, with a median age of 61 (interquartile range: 56-65) and a diagnostic prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 5.5 ng/mL (interquartile range: 4.3-7.5). Upgrading was observed in 34% of men, including 44% of 7402 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 and 19% of 5057 patients with Gleason 3 + 4 disease. Age, clinical stage, diagnostic PSA, and % prostate needle biopsy cores positive were independently associated with odds of any upgrading at RP. In baseline Gleason 3 + 3 disease, extreme upgrading was observed in 6%, with increasing age, diagnostic PSA, and >50% core positivity associated with increased odds. In baseline Gleason 3 + 4 disease, extreme upgrading was observed in 4%, with diagnostic PSA and palpable disease remaining predictive. Positive surgical margins were significantly higher in patients with extreme upgrading at RP (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Gleason upgrading at RP is common in this large population-based cohort, including extreme upgrading in a clinically significant portion.