Predictive Factors for Reclassification and Relapse in Prostate Cancer Eligible for Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Active Surveillance for Taiwanese Men with Localized Prostate Cancer: Intermediate-Term Outcomes and Predictive Factors

PURPOSE

Active surveillance (AS) is one of the management options for patients with low-risk and select intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PC). However, factors predicting disease reclassification and conversion to active treatment from a large population of pure Asian cohorts regarding AS are less evaluated. This study investigated the intermediate-term outcomes of patients with localized PC undergoing AS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cohort study enrolled consecutive men with localized non-high-risk PC diagnosed in Taiwan between June 2012 and Jan 2023. The study endpoints were disease reclassification (either pathological or radiographic progression) and conversion to active treatment. The factors predicting endpoints were evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

A total of 405 patients (median age: 67.2 years) were consecutively enrolled and followed up with a median of 64.6 months. Based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk grouping, 70 (17.3%), 164 (40.5%), 140 (34.6%), and 31 (7.7%) patients were classified as very low-risk, low-risk, favorable-intermediate risk, and unfavorable intermediate-risk PC, respectively. The 5-year reclassification rates were 24.8%, 27.0%, 18.6%, and 25.3%, respectively. The 5-year conversion rates were 20.4%, 28.8%, 43.6%, and 37.8%, respectively. A prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) of ≥0.15 ng/mL² predicted reclassification (hazard ratio [HR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-2.88) and conversion (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.05-2.31). A maximal percentage of cancer in positive cores (MPCPC) of ≥15% predicted conversion (15% to <50%: HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.91-2.18; ≥50%: HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.1453-3.40) compared with that of <15%. A Gleason grade group (GGG) of 3 tumor also predicted conversion (HR 2.69, 95% CI 1.06-6.79; GGG 3 vs 1). One patient developed metastasis, but none died of PC during the study period (2,141 person-years).

CONCLUSIONS

AS is a viable option for Taiwanese men with non-high-risk PC, in terms of reclassification and conversion. High PSAD predicted reclassification, whereas high PSAD, MPCPC, and GGG predicted conversion.

Clinical and histopathological parameters in transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies associated with tumor upgrading after radical prostatectomy: A comparative analysis of risk groups

BACKGROUND

Thanks to technological advances, prostate cancer (PCa) can be diagnosed at a younger age. It is known that most of these patients are in the low-intermediate risk group, and the histological grade of the tumor increases in half of those undergoing radical prostatectomy (Rp) compared to their diagnostic biopsies. This is especially important in terms of active surveillance (AS) and/or the timely evaluation of curative treatment options in patients diagnosed at an early age. Our aim was to investigate clinical and histopathological parameters that may be associated with an increase in the histological grade of the tumor in patients with acinar adenocarcinoma who were diagnosed by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) and underwent Rp.

METHODS

A total of 205 patients with classical acinar adenocarcinoma diagnosed by TRUS-Bx without metastasis and who underwent Rp were grouped according to the D'Amico risk classification. Age at diagnosis, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score, clinical stage, Gleason Grade Group (GGG), high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia in tumor-free cores (HGPIN) (single and ≥2 cores), perineural invasion (PNI), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was obtained. Additionally, GGG, pathological stage, lymph node metastasis, surgical margin positivity, and tumor volume obtained from Rp were evaluated. Comparisons were made between the case groups in which the tumor grade increased and remained the same, in terms of age, serum PSA, PSA density, HGPIN in tumor-free cores (single and ≥2 cores), PNI, and LVI in all biopsies (with or without tumors), as well as risk groups. In addition, the relationships of HGPIN in tumor-free cores (single and ≥2 cores), PNI, and LVI on TRUS-Bx with age, serum PSA and PSA density, tumor volume, surgical margin positivity, pathological stage, lymph node metastasis, and risk groups were examined separately.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 72 (35.1%) were in the low-risk group, 95 (46.3%) in the intermediate-risk group, and 38 (18.5%) in the high-risk group. Most of the patients with an increased histological grade (n = 38, 48.1%) were in the low-risk group (p < 0.05) and had an advanced median age. HGPIN in single and ≥2 tumor-free cores and PNI were more common in these patients (p < 0.01, p < 0.001, and p < 0.05, respectively). According to the multivariable analysis, advanced age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.087, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.029-1.148, p < 0.05), high serum PSA (OR: 1.047, 95% CI: 1.006-1.090, p < 0.05), HGPIN in ≥2 tumor-free cores (OR: 6.346, 95% CI: 3.136-12.912, p < 0.001), and PNI (OR: 3.138, 95% CI: 1.179-8.356, p < 0.05) were independent risk factors for a tumor upgrade. Furthermore, being in the low-risk group was an independent risk factor when compared to the intermediate- and high-risk groups (OR: 0.187, 95% CI: 0.080-0.437, p < 0.001 and OR: 0.054, 95% CI: 0.013-0.230, p < 0.001, respectively). The HGPIN diagnosis was more common in the low- and intermediate-risk groups. Advanced age at diagnosis, high serum PSA and PSA density values were associated with PNI on TRUS-Bx. High serum PSA and PSA density values were associated with LVI on TRUS-Bx. Surgical margin positivity was higher in cases with PNI and LVI detected by TRUS-Bx. HGPIN in ≥2 tumor-free cores, PNI, and LVI on TRUS-Bx were associated with a higher rate of lymph node metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients diagnosed with acinar adenocarcinoma, the presence of HGPIN even in a single tumor-free core on TRUS-Bx was found to be significant in terms of showing an increase in the histological tumor grade in Rp. The diagnosis of HGPIN in ≥2 tumor-free cores on TRUS-Bx was determined as an independent risk factor for an increased Gleason score after Rp. Furthermore, an advanced age, a high serum PSA value, being in the low-risk group, and the presence of PNI were associated with a tumor upgrade. HGPIN in ≥2 tumor-free cores, PNI, and LVI were also associated with lymph node metastasis. Therefore, the diagnosis of HGPIN should be signed out on pathological reports.

Active Surveillance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Current Data

Simple Summary

AS is an option for the initial management of selected patients with intermediate-risk PC. The proper way to predict which men will have an aggressive clinical course or indolent PC who would benefit from AS has not been unveiled. Genetics and MRI can help in the decision-making, but it remains unclear which men would benefit from which tests. In addition, there are several differences between AS protocols in inclusion criteria, monitoring follow-up, and triggers for active treatment. Large series and a few RCTs are under investigation, and more research is needed to establish an optimal therapeutic strategy for patients with intermediate-risk PC. This study summarizes the current data on patients with intermediate-risk PC under AS, recent findings, and discusses future directions.

Abstract

Active surveillance (AS) is a monitoring strategy to avoid or defer curative treatment, minimizing the side effects of radiotherapy and prostatectomy without compromising survival. AS in intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PC) has increasingly become used. There is heterogeneity in intermediate-risk PC patients. Some of them have an aggressive clinical course and require active treatment, while others have indolent disease and may benefit from AS. However, intermediate-risk patients have an increased risk of metastasis, and the proper way to select the best candidates for AS is unknown. In addition, there are several differences between AS protocols in inclusion criteria, monitoring follow-up, and triggers for active treatment. A few large series and randomized trials are under investigation. Therefore, more research is needed to establish an optimal therapeutic strategy for patients with intermediate-risk disease. This study summarizes the current data on patients with intermediate-risk PC under AS, recent findings, and discusses future directions.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of active surveillance in prostate cancer among urologists: a real-life survey from Brazil

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred treatment for patients with very low-and low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), but it is underperformed worldwide. This study aimed to report knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of AS for PCa among urologists in Brazil.

Methods

This cross-sectional study used a questionnaire with 50 questions divided into participant characteristics, knowledge regarding inclusion criteria for AS, follow-up, intervention triggers, acceptance, and practice for an index patient. Data analysis comprises absolute and relative frequencies of the variables. After that, a logistic regression was performed in order to verify possible patterns of answers provided by the respondents in the index patient questionnaire.

Results

Questionnaires were sent through the SurveyMonkey® platform to 5,015 urologists using email addresses and through social media. A total of 600 (12%) questionnaires returned and 413 (8.2%) were completed and included in the analysis. Only 53% of urologists adopt AS for low- and very-low-risk PCa. Inclusion criteria were patients with age > 50 years (32.2%), prostate specific antigen (PSA) < 10 ng/mL (87.2%), T1 clinical stage (80.4%), Biopsy Gleason score ≤ 6, positive cores ≤ 2 (44.3%), positive core involvement < 50% (45.3%), and magnetic resonance imaging findings (38.7%). The PSA doubling time was still used by 60.3%. Confirmatory biopsy (55.9%), PSA level (36.6%), and digital rectal examination (34.4%) were considered by most urologists for follow-ups. Patient preference (85.7%), upgrade of Gleason score (73.4%), and increased number of positive cores (66.8%) were associated with conversion to definitive treatment. In an index patient, non-acceptance and active treatment request were the most cited reasons for not performing AS.

Conclusion

There is significant variability in the KAP of AS in Brazil, which indicates the need to reinforce AS, its inclusion and follow-up criteria, and the benefits for physicians and the general population.

Trial registration: Not applicable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12894-022-01036-1.

Active surveillance in favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer: outstanding questions and controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Active surveillance has become the preferred management strategy for patients with low risk prostate cancer, but it is unclear if active surveillance can be safely extended to favorable intermediate risk (FIR) prostate cancer patients. Furthermore, defining a favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer population safe for active surveillance remains elusive due to paucity of high-level data in this population. This article serves to review relevant data, particularly the safety of active surveillance in grade group 2 patients, and what tools are available to aid in selecting a favorable subset of intermediate risk patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Active surveillance studies with long-term data appear to report worsened survival outcomes in intermediate risk patients when compared to those undergoing definitive treatment, but there exists a subset of intermediate risk patients with nearly equivalent outcomes to low risk patients on active surveillance. Tools such as percentage and total length of Gleason pattern 4, tumor volume, prostate specific antigen density, magnetic resonance imaging, and genomic modifiers may help to select a favorable subset of intermediate risk prostate cancer appropriate for active surveillance.

SUMMARY

Active surveillance is a viable strategy in select patients with low volume group grade 2 (GG2) prostate cancer. Prospective and retrospective data in the FIR population appear to be mostly favorable in regards to survival outcomes, but there exists some heterogeneity with respect to long-term outcomes in this patient population.

Patient- and tumor-level risk factors for MRI-invisible prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric MRI is highly sensitive for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, but has a 10-20% false negative rate. It is unknown if there are clinical factors that predict MRI invisibility. We sought to identify predictors of MRI-invisible (MRI(-)) disease.

METHODS

Men undergoing MRI/US-fusion targeted + systematic biopsy by two surgeons at our institution from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical data, MRI metrics, and biopsy pathology results were obtained by chart review. An MRI(-) tumor was defined as a positive systematic biopsy in a zone without an MRI lesion. Factors associated with presence of MRI(-) tumors were identified using stepwise multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 194 men included in the analysis, 79 (41%) and 25 (13%) men had GG1+ and GG2+ MRI(-) tumors, respectively. On multivariable analysis, only Black race was associated with presence of GG1+ MRI(-) tumors (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.02-4.96). Black race (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.24-9.87) and higher PSA density (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.34-3.20) were associated with presence of GG2+ MRI(-) tumors. In non-Black and Black men, detection of MRI(-) tumors on systematic biopsy upgraded patients from no disease to GG2+ disease 1% and 11% of the time, respectively, and from GG1 to GG2+ disease 42% and 60% of the time, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Black race and PSA density were associated with presence of MRI(-) prostate cancer. Further study on racial differences is warranted based on these results. Surgeons should consider pre-biopsy risk factors before deciding to omit systematic prostate biopsy regardless of mpMRI results.

Comparative analysis of 1152 African-American and European-American men with prostate cancer identifies distinct genomic and immunological differences

Racial disparities in prostate cancer have not been well characterized on a genomic level. Here we show the results of a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of 1,152 patients (596 African-American men (AAM) and 556 European-American men (EAM)) who underwent radical prostatectomy. Comparative analyses between the race groups were conducted at the clinical, genomic, pathway, molecular subtype, and prognostic levels. The EAM group had increased ERG (P < 0.001) and ETS (P = 0.02) expression, decreased SPINK1 expression (P < 0.001), and basal-like (P < 0.001) molecular subtypes. After adjusting for confounders, the AAM group was associated with higher expression of CRYBB2, GSTM3, and inflammation genes (IL33, IFNG, CCL4, CD3, ICOSLG), and lower expression of mismatch repair genes (MSH2, MSH6) (p < 0.001 for all). At the pathway level, the AAM group had higher expression of genes sets related to the immune response, apoptosis, hypoxia, and reactive oxygen species. EAM group was associated with higher levels of fatty acid metabolism, DNA repair, and WNT/beta-catenin signaling. Based on cell lines data, AAM were predicted to have higher potential response to DNA damage. In conclusion, biological characteristics of prostate tumor were substantially different in AAM when compared to EAM.

Walter Rayford, Alp Tuna Beksac et al. investigated gene expression alterations in African-American and European-American men who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. The observed differences include higher expression of inflammation genes and lower expression of mismatch repair genes in African-American men.

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2020 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2016 and 2020. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. Risk-adapted screening should be offered to men at increased risk from the age of 45 yr and to breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers, who have been confirmed to be at risk of early and aggressive disease (mainly BRAC2), from around 40 yr of age. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is performed, a combination of targeted and systematic biopsies must be offered. There is currently no place for the routine use of tissue-based biomarkers. Whilst prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography is the most sensitive staging procedure, the lack of outcome benefit remains a major limitation. Active surveillance (AS) should always be discussed with low-risk patients, as well as with selected intermediate-risk patients with favourable International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the AS journey and the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A strong recommendation to consider moderate hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term hormonal treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. The 2020 EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for their use in clinical practice. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Updated prostate cancer guidelines are presented, addressing screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. These guidelines rely on the available scientific evidence, and new insights will need to be considered and included on a regular basis. In some cases, the supporting evidence for new treatment options is not yet strong enough to provide a recommendation, which is why continuous updating is important. Patients must be fully informed of all relevant options and, together with their treating physicians, decide on the most optimal management for them.

Recaída bioquímica en cáncer de próstata de bajo riesgo tratados con prostatectomía radical y linfadenectomía pélvica

Objetivo La linfadenectomía pélvica ampliada es el método más confiable para identificar compromiso ganglionar en cáncer de próstata, sin embargo, la morbilidad, el tiempo quirúrgico, el papel terapéutico y las complicaciones, han sido temas de debate. El objetivo del estudio fue describir las características clínicas y patológicas de acuerdo con la presentación de recaída bioquimíca de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata de bajo riesgo tratados con prostatectomía radical más linfadenectomía pélvica ampliada.

Métodos Estudio descriptivo longitudinal retrospectivo en una cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de próstata de bajo riesgo tratados quirúrgicamente, entre enero 2006 hasta diciembre 2016. Se revisaron 210 historias clínicas, 178 cumplían los criterios de inclusión: PSA < 10 ng/mL; Gleason < 6, cT1–cT2a, revisión de las biopsias de próstata y procedimientos quirúrgicos realizados en la misma institución. Las variables a evaluar: porcentaje de compromiso tumoral, invasión linfovascular, concordancia de gleason, numero de ganglios resecados, ganglios positivos, densidad ganglionar, recaída bioquímica.

Resultados 178 pacientes con: 64 años, 62% T1c, psa de 6,37, compromiso de biopsia 23%. El 47% estaban subestadificados por gleason, con un promedio de ganglios resecados de 21, el compromiso ganglionar se encontró en un 3%, los bordes positivos en un 34% y la recaída bioquímica en un 19%. De los 33 pacientes con recaída bioquímica, el 6% tenían ganglios positivos y el 79% tenían bordes positivos, comparado con los que no recayeron: el 1% tenían ganglios positivos y el 23% eran R1, mientras que la invasión linfovascular solo estuvo presente en el 6% vs el 1% sin recaída. El tiempo a la recaída fue de 26 meses.

Conclusiones El compromiso ganglionar en cáncer de próstata es bajo, pero la subestadificación es alta. En el grupo de recaída bioquímica se observó que la mayoría de los pacientes presentaban bordes positivos y una subestadificacion del Gleason.

A prospective study of a urine and plasma biomarker test for the prediction of gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer in a mixed cohort

Purpose: Definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer is based on biopsies, a procedure associated with side-effects. The use of biomarkers in blood and urine could potentially help clinicians select patients for whom biopsies are needed. The aim of the study was to test a new urine and plasma biomarker test in detecting medium and high grade prostate cancer.Materials and methods: Blood and urine samples were prospectively collected from 41 patients prior to prostate biopsy or TUR-P and again after 3 months. The cohort included patients with suspicion of prostate cancer and patients with prior prostate cancer diagnosis. The mRNA expression of ten selected genes measured by PCR were used together with clinical data in multiple algorithms for prediction of medium-high grade prostate cancer in prostate biopsies. The testing was originally developed and validated in the USA. The method was transferred to a local Danish laboratory. Medium and high grade cancer was defined as Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4.Results: Using the biomarker test, prior to any prostate procedures, the sensitivity for detecting medium-high grade prostate cancer was 100% and the specificity was 56% and 63%, depending on the cut-off point used. When using the biomarker test, following biopsy or TUR-P, the sensitivity and specificity were reduced to 89% and 28-34% respectively. When comparing results, there was a significant difference (p < 0.05), favoring the test performed prior to the procedures.Conclusions: We were able to predict the presence of medium-high grade prostate cancer, thereby confirming earlier findings of the biomarker test.

Active Surveillance for Favorable Risk Prostate Cancer in African Caribbean Men: Results of a Prospective Study

PURPOSE

Active surveillance is a treatment option for favorable risk prostate cancer. However, data are missing on populations of African descent. We evaluated the safety and benefit of active surveillance in an African Caribbean cohort with favorable risk prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2005 and 2016, a single center, prospective cohort study was performed in Guadeloupe, French West Indies, including patients on active surveillance who had low risk prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen 10 ng/ml or less and Gleason score 6 or less) or favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen 10 to 20 ng/ml, Gleason score 3 + 4 or less and life expectancy less than 10 years). Treatment was recommended in case of grade progression, increased tumor volume, prostate cancer doubling time less than 36 months or patient wish. Overall survival, disease specific survival and duration of active surveillance were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify predictors of active surveillance termination.

RESULTS

A total of 234 patients with a median age of 64 years were enrolled in study. Median followup was 4 years (IQR 2.3-5.5). Overall survival at 30 months, 5 years and 10 years was 99.5%, 98.5% and 90.7%, respectively. Disease specific survival at 30 months, and 5 and 10 years was 100%. At 30 months, 5 years and 10 years 72.7%, 52.6% and 40.4% of patients, respectively, remained untreated and on active surveillance. Age (HR 0.96 per additional year, 95% CI 0.93-0.99) and prostate specific antigen density (HR 1.52 per additional 0.1 ng/ml, 95% CI 1.20-1.89) were found to be independent predictors of active surveillance termination.

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance is safe and beneficial for highly selected African Caribbean patients. It seems to be feasible for patients at low risk and intermediate favorable risk. Prostate specific antigen density could help better select these patients.

Importance of cost-effectiveness and value in cancer care and healthcare policy

The cost of cancer care has increased by five fold over the last three decades. As our healthcare system shifts from volume to value, greater scrutiny of interventions with clinical equipoise is required. Traditionally, QALYs and ICER have served as surrogate markers for value. However, this approach fails to incorporate all stakeholders' viewpoints. Prostate cancer, low risk DCIS, and thyroid cancer are used as a framework to discuss value and cost-effectiveness. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:275-280. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.