Evaluation of an Epigenetic Assay for Predicting Repeat Prostate Biopsy Outcome in African American Men

Molecular diagnostics of prostate cancer: impact of molecular tests

ABSTRACT

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death among men. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is used in screening programs for early detection with a consequent reduction of PCa-specific mortality at the cost of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of the nonaggressive PCa. Recently, several assays have been commercially developed to implement PCa diagnosis, but they have not been included in both screening and diagnosis of PCa. This review aims to describe the actual and novel commercially available molecular biomarkers that can be used in PCa management to implement and tailor the screening and diagnosis of PCa.

Race-specific coregulatory and transcriptomic profiles associated with DNA methylation and androgen receptor in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is a significant health concern, particularly among African American (AA) men who exhibit higher incidence and mortality compared to European American (EA) men. Understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying these disparities is imperative for enhancing clinical management and achieving better outcomes.

METHODS

Employing a multi-omics approach, we analyzed prostate cancer in both AA and EA men. Using Illumina methylation arrays and RNA sequencing, we investigated DNA methylation and gene expression in tumor and non-tumor prostate tissues. Additionally, Boolean analysis was utilized to unravel complex networks contributing to racial disparities in prostate cancer.

RESULTS

When comparing tumor and adjacent non-tumor prostate tissues, we found that DNA hypermethylated regions are enriched for PRC2/H3K27me3 pathways and EZH2/SUZ12 cofactors. Olfactory/ribosomal pathways and distinct cofactors, including CTCF and KMT2A, were enriched in DNA hypomethylated regions in prostate tumors from AA men. We identified race-specific inverse associations of DNA methylation with expression of several androgen receptor (AR) associated genes, including the GATA family of transcription factors and TRIM63. This suggests that race-specific dysregulation of the AR signaling pathway exists in prostate cancer. To investigate the effect of AR inhibition on race-specific gene expression changes, we generated in-silico patient-specific prostate cancer Boolean networks. Our simulations revealed prolonged AR inhibition causes significant dysregulation of TGF-β, IDH1, and cell cycle pathways specifically in AA prostate cancer. We further quantified global gene expression changes, which revealed differential expression of genes related to microtubules, immune function, and TMPRSS2-fusion pathways, specifically in prostate tumors of AA men. Enrichment of these pathways significantly correlated with an altered risk of disease progression in a race-specific manner.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals unique signaling networks underlying prostate cancer biology in AA and EA men, offering potential insights for clinical management strategies tailored to specific racial groups. Targeting AR and associated pathways could be particularly beneficial in addressing the disparities observed in prostate cancer outcomes in the context of AA and EA men. Further investigation into these identified pathways may lead to the development of personalized therapeutic approaches to improve outcomes for prostate cancer patients across different racial backgrounds.

Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer: From Diagnosis to Treatment

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

A Novel Blood Proteomic Signature for Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common malignant tumour in men. Improved testing for diagnosis, risk prediction, and response to treatment would improve care. Here, we identified a proteomic signature of prostate cancer in peripheral blood using data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry combined with machine learning. A highly predictive signature was derived, which was associated with relevant pathways, including the coagulation, complement, and clotting cascades, as well as plasma lipoprotein particle remodeling. We further validated the identified biomarkers against a second cohort, identifying a panel of five key markers (GP5, SERPINA5, ECM1, IGHG1, and THBS1) which retained most of the diagnostic power of the overall dataset, achieving an AUC of 0.91. Taken together, this study provides a proteomic signature complementary to PSA for the diagnosis of patients with localised prostate cancer, with the further potential for assessing risk of future development of prostate cancer. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD025484.

Biomarkers of Aggressive Prostate Cancer at Diagnosis

In the United States, prostate cancer (CaP) remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men. CaP is predominantly indolent at diagnosis, with a small fraction (25-30%) representing an aggressive subtype (Gleason score 7-10) that is prone to metastatic progression. This fact, coupled with the criticism surrounding the role of prostate specific antigen in prostate cancer screening, demonstrates the current need for a biomarker(s) that can identify clinically significant CaP and avoid unnecessary biopsy procedures and psychological implications of being diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Although several diagnostic biomarkers are available to clinicians, very few comparative trials have been performed to assess the clinical effectiveness of these biomarkers. It is of note, however, that a majority of these clinical trials have been over-represented by men of Caucasian origin, despite the fact that African American men have a 1.7 times higher incidence and 2.1 times higher rate of mortality from prostate cancer. Biomarkers for CaP diagnosis based on the tissue of origin include urine-based gene expression assays (PCA3, Select MDx, ExoDx Prostate IntelliScore, Mi-Prostate Score, PCA3-PCGEM1 gene panel), blood-based protein biomarkers (4K, PHI), and tissue-based DNA biomarker (Confirm MDx). Another potential direction that has emerged to aid in the CaP diagnosis include multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI), which in conjunction with clinically validated biomarkers may provide a better approach to predict clinically significant CaP at diagnosis. In this review, we discuss some of the adjunctive biomarker tests along with newer imaging modalities that are currently available to help clinicians decide which patients are at risk of having high-grade CaP on prostate biopsy with the emphasis on clinical utility of the tests across African American (AA) and Caucasian (CA) men.

Methylation biomarkers for early cancer detection and diagnosis: Current and future perspectives

The increase in recent scientific studies on cancer biomarkers has brought great new insights into the field. Moreover, novel technological breakthroughs such as long read sequencing and microarrays have enabled high throughput profiling of many biomarkers, while advances in bioinformatic tools have made the possibility of developing highly reliable and accurate biomarkers a reality. These changes triggered renewed interest in biomarker research and provided tremendous opportunities for enhancing cancer management and improving early disease detection. DNA methylation alterations are known to accompany and contribute to carcinogenesis, making them promising biomarkers for cancer, namely due to their stability, frequency and accessibility in bodily fluids. The advent of newer minimally invasive experimental methods such as liquid biopsies provide the perfect setting for methylation-based biomarker development and application. Despite their huge potential, accurate and robust biomarkers for the conclusive diagnosis of most cancer types are still not routinely used, hence a strong need for sustained research in this field is still needed. This review provides a brief exposition of current methylation biomarkers for cancer diagnosis and early detection, including markers already in clinical use as well as various upcoming ones. It also outlines how recent big data and novel technologies will revolutionise the next generation of cancer tests in supplementing or replacing currently existing invasive techniques.

Potential Role of Seven Proteomics Tissue Biomarkers for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer in Urine

As the currently available tests for the clinical management of prostate cancer (PCa) are still far from providing precise diagnosis and risk stratification, the identification of new molecular marker(s) remains a pertinent clinical need. Candidate PCa biomarkers from the published proteomic comparative studies of prostate tissue (2002-2020) were collected and systematically evaluated. AZGP1, MDH2, FABP5, ENO1, GSTP1, GSTM2, and EZR were chosen for further evaluation in the urine of 85 PCa patients and controls using ELISA. Statistically significant differences in protein levels between PCa and BPH showed FABP5 (p = 0.019) and ENO1 (p = 0.015). A biomarker panel based on the combination of FABP5, ENO1, and PSA provided the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.795) for PCa detection. The combination of FABP5, EZR, AZGP1, and MDH2 showed AUC = 0.889 in PCa prognosis, with 85.29% of the samples correctly classified into low and high Gleason score (GS) groups. The addition of PSA to the panel slightly increased the AUC to 0.914. AZGP1, FABP5, and EZR showed significant correlation with GS, stage, and percentage of positive biopsy cores. Although validation using larger patient cohorts will be necessary to establish the credibility of the proposed biomarker panels in a clinical context, this study opens a way for the further testing of more high-quality proteomics biomarkers, which could ultimately add value to the clinical management of PCa.

Cancer epigenetics in clinical practice

Cancer development is driven by the accumulation of alterations affecting the structure and function of the genome. Whereas genetic changes disrupt the DNA sequence, epigenetic alterations contribute to the acquisition of hallmark tumor capabilities by regulating gene expression programs that promote tumorigenesis. Shifts in DNA methylation and histone mark patterns, the two main epigenetic modifications, orchestrate tumor progression and metastasis. These cancer-specific events have been exploited as useful tools for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment choice to aid clinical decision making. Moreover, the reversibility of epigenetic modifications, in contrast to the irreversibility of genetic changes, has made the epigenetic machinery an attractive target for drug development. This review summarizes the most advanced applications of epigenetic biomarkers and epigenetic drugs in the clinical setting, highlighting commercially available DNA methylation-based assays and epigenetic drugs already approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.

Prostate cancer screening: Continued controversies and novel biomarker advancements

Prostate cancer (PCa) screening remains one of the most controversial topics in clinical and public health. Despite being the second most common cancer in men worldwide, recommendations for screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are unclear. Early detection and the resulting postscreening treatment lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of otherwise indolent cases. In addition, several unwanted harms are associated with PCa screening process. This literature review focuses on the limitations of PSA-specific PCa screening, reasons behind the screening controversy, and the novel biomarkers and advanced innovative methodologies that improve the limitations of traditional screening using PSA. With the verdict of whether or not to screen not yet unanimous, we hope to aid in resolution of the long-standing debate.

Health inequity drives disease biology to create disparities in prostate cancer outcomes

Prostate cancer exerts a greater toll on African American men than on White men of European descent (hereafter referred to as European American men): the disparity in incidence and mortality is greater than that of any other common cancer. The disproportionate impact of prostate cancer on Black men has been attributed to the genetics of African ancestry, to diet and lifestyle risk factors, and to unequal access to quality health care. In this Review, all of these influences are considered in the context of the evolving understanding that chronic or recurrent inflammatory processes drive prostatic carcinogenesis. Studies of inherited susceptibility highlight the contributions of genes involved in prostate cell and tissue repair (BRCA1/2, ATM) and regeneration (HOXB13 and MYC). Social determinants of health appear to accentuate these genetic influences by fueling prostate inflammation and associated cell and genome damage. Molecular characterization of the prostate cancers that arise in Black versus White men further implicates this inflammatory microenvironment in disease behavior. Yet, when Black and White men with similar grade and stage of prostate cancer are treated equally, they exhibit equivalent outcomes. The central role of prostate inflammation in prostate cancer development and progression augments the impact of the social determinants of health on disease pathogenesis. And, when coupled with poorer access to high-quality treatment, these inequities result in a disparate burden of prostate cancer on African American men.

Epigenome-Wide Association Study of Prostate Cancer in African Americans Identifies DNA Methylation Biomarkers for Aggressive Disease

DNA methylation plays important roles in prostate cancer (PCa) development and progression. African American men have higher incidence and mortality rates of PCa than other racial groups in U.S. The goal of this study was to identify differentially methylated CpG sites and genes between clinically defined aggressive and nonaggressive PCa in African Americans. We performed genome-wide DNA methylation profiling in leukocyte DNA from 280 African American PCa patients using Illumina MethylationEPIC array that contains about 860K CpG sties. There was a slight increase of overall methylation level (mean β value) with the increasing Gleason scores (GS = 6, GS = 7, GS ≥ 8, P for trend = 0.002). There were 78 differentially methylated CpG sites with P < 10-4 and 9 sites with P < 10-5 in the trend test. We also found 77 differentially methylated regions/genes (DMRs), including 10 homeobox genes and six zinc finger protein genes. A gene ontology (GO) molecular pathway enrichment analysis of these 77 DMRs found that the main enriched pathway was DNA-binding transcriptional factor activity. A few representative DMRs include HOXD8, SOX11, ZNF-471, and ZNF-577. Our study suggests that leukocyte DNA methylation may be valuable biomarkers for aggressive PCa and the identified differentially methylated genes provide biological insights into the modulation of immune response by aggressive PCa.

Epigenetic approaches for cervical neoplasia screening (Review)

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the leading cause of cervical cancer. The Papanicolaou cytology test is the usually employed type of screening for this infection; however, its sensibility is limited. Only a small percentage of women infected with high-risk HPV develop cervical cancer with an array of genetic and epigenetic modifications. Thus, it is necessary to develop rapid, reproducible and minimally invasive technologies for screening. DNA methylation has gained attention as an alternative method for molecular diagnosis and prognosis in HPV infection. The aim of the present review was to highlight the potential of DNA methylation in cervical neoplasia screening for clinical applications. It was observed that the methylation human and viral genes was correlated with high-grade lesions and cancer. Methylation biomarkers have shown a good capacity to discriminate between high-grade lesions with a transformative potential and cervical cancer, being able to detect these modifications at an early stage. With further research, the epigenetic profiles and subtypes of the tumors could be elaborated, which would aid in therapy selection by opening avenues in personalized precision medicine. Response to therapy could also be evaluated through such methods and the accessibility of liquid biopsies would allow a constant monitoring of the patient's status without invasive sampling techniques.

Tumour markers of prostate cancer: The post-PSA era

Although PSA-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening had a positive impact in reducing PCa mortality, it also led to overdiagnosis, overtreatment and to a significant number of unnecessary biopsies. In the post-PSA era, new biomarkers have emerged that can complement the information given by PSA, towards a better cancer diagnostic specificity, and also allow a better estimate of the aggressiveness of the disease and its clinical outcome. That means those markers have the potential to assist the clinician in the decision-making processes, such as whether or not to perform a biopsy, and to make the best treatment choice among the new therapeutic options available, including active surveillance (AS) in lower risk disease. In this article, we will review several of those more recent diagnostic markers (4Kscore®, [-2]proPSA and Prostate Health Index (PHI), SelectMDx®, ConfirmMDx®, Progensa® Prostate Cancer Antigen 3, Mi-Prostate Score, ExoDx™ Prostate Test, the Stockholm-3 test and ERSPC risk calculators) and prognostic markers (OncotypeDX® Genomic Prostate Score, Prolaris®, Decipher® and ProMark®). We will also address some new liquid biopsy approaches - circulating tumour cells and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) - with a potential role in metastatic castration-resistant PCa and will briefly give some future perspectives, mostly outlooking epigenetic markers.

Tissue- and Liquid-Based Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Precision Medicine

Worldwide, prostate cancer (PC) is the second-most-frequently diagnosed male cancer and the fifth-most-common cause of all cancer-related deaths. Suspicion of PC in a patient is largely based upon clinical signs and the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Although PSA levels have been criticised for a lack of specificity, leading to PC over-diagnosis, it is still the most commonly used biomarker in PC management. Unfortunately, PC is extremely heterogeneous, and it can be difficult to stratify patients whose tumours are unlikely to progress from those that are aggressive and require treatment intensification. Although PC-specific biomarker research has previously focused on disease diagnosis, there is an unmet clinical need for novel prognostic, predictive and treatment response biomarkers that can be used to provide a precision medicine approach to PC management. In particular, the identification of biomarkers at the time of screening/diagnosis that can provide an indication of disease aggressiveness is perhaps the greatest current unmet clinical need in PC management. Largely through advances in genomic and proteomic techniques, exciting pre-clinical and clinical research is continuing to identify potential tissue, blood and urine-based PC-specific biomarkers that may in the future supplement or replace current standard practices. In this review, we describe how PC-specific biomarker research is progressing, including the evolution of PSA-based tests and those novel assays that have gained clinical approval. We also describe alternative diagnostic biomarkers to PSA, in addition to biomarkers that can predict PC aggressiveness and biomarkers that can predict response to certain therapies. We believe that novel biomarker research has the potential to make significant improvements to the clinical management of this disease in the near future.

Prostate Cancer Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers' Clinical Utility in Diagnosis and Prognosis

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men worldwide. The current gold standard for diagnosing PCa relies on a transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic core needle biopsy indicated after detection changes in a digital rectal examination (DRE) and elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level in the blood serum. PSA is a marker produced by prostate cells, not just cancer cells. Therefore, an elevated PSA level may be associated with other symptoms such as benign prostatic hyperplasia or inflammation of the prostate gland. Due to this marker's low specificity, a common problem is overdiagnosis, which leads to unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment. This is associated with various treatment complications (such as bleeding or infection) and generates unnecessary costs. Therefore, there is no doubt that the improvement of the current procedure by applying effective, sensitive and specific markers is an urgent need. Several non-invasive, cost-effective, high-accuracy liquid biopsy diagnostic biomarkers such as Progensa PCA3, MyProstateScore ExoDx, SelectMDx, PHI, 4K, Stockholm3 and ConfirmMDx have been developed in recent years. This article compares current knowledge about them and their potential application in clinical practice.

Prostate cancer biomarkers and multiparametric MRI: is there a role for both in prostate cancer management?

Several advancements have been made in recent years with regards to the detection and evaluation of prostate cancer (PCa). The low specificity of prostate specific antigen (PSA) has left much to be desired in a test, but a boom in novel biomarkers has made screening and surveillance more complicated. Several attempts at identifying a niche for these tests has helped somewhat, but much is still undetermined about the benefit that each test provides. In addition to laboratory tests, advancements in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and PIRADSv.2 scoring have provided significant benefit to the evaluation of PCa. With the widespread use of prostate imaging, it is important to re-evaluate the impact of novel biomarkers in the context of furthering PCa screening and management. In this review, we aim to assess the influence mpMRI has on the role of nine different novel biomarkers in the detection and evaluation of PCa. We performed a review of current peer-reviewed literature to assess this question. Much data has been published on the role of these tests, allowing for their placement into one of three best-fit categories: tests for biopsy-naïve men (Prostate Health Index, Mi Prostate Score, 4K Score); tests for men with prior negative biopsies (ConfirmMDx, Progensa PCA3); and men on active surveillance (OncotypeDx, Prolaris, Decipher). Data on the role of these tests with the use of mpMRI have not been comprehensive and excludes several of the markers. More research is needed to determine the combined impact mpMRI and the novel biomarkers on the evaluation and management of PCa.

Commercialized Blood-, Urinary- and Tissue-Based Biomarker Tests for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis

In the diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer (PCa), the serum prostate-specific antigen test is widely used but is associated with low specificity. Therefore, blood-, urinary- and tissue-based biomarker tests have been developed, intended to be used in the diagnostic and prognostic setting of PCa. This review provides an overview of commercially available biomarker tests developed to be used in several clinical stages of PCa management. In the diagnostic setting, the following tests can help selecting the right patients for initial and/or repeat biopsy: PHI, 4K, MiPS, SelectMDx, ExoDx, Proclarix, ConfirmMDx, PCA3 and PCMT. In the prognostic setting, the Prolaris, OncotypeDx and Decipher test can help in risk-stratification of patients regarding treatment decisions. Following, an overview is provided of the studies available comparing the performance of biomarker tests. However, only a small number of recently published head-to-head comparison studies are available. In contrast, recent research has focused on the use of biomarker tests in relation to the (complementary) use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in PCa diagnosis.

Current status of development of methylation biomarkers for in vitro diagnostic IVD applications

A significant volume of research clearly shows that disease-related methylation changes can be used as biomarkers at all stages of clinical disease management, including risk assessment and predisposition screening through early diagnostics to personalization of patient care and monitoring of the relapse and chronic disease. Thus disease-related methylation changes are an attractive source of the biomarkers that can have significant impact on precision medicine. However, the translation of the research findings in methylation biomarkers field to clinical practice is at the very least not satisfactory. That is mainly because the evidence generated in research studies indicating the utility of the disease-related methylation change to predict clinical outcome is in majority of the cases not sufficient to postulate the diagnostic use of the biomarker. The research studies need to be followed by well-designed and systematic investigations of clinical utility of the biomarker that produce data of sufficient quality to meet regulatory approval for the test to be used to make clinically valid decision. In this review, we describe methylation-based IVD tests currently approved for IVD use or at the advanced stages of the development for the diagnostic use. For each of those tests, we analyze the technologies that the test utilizes for methylation detection as well as describe the types of the clinical studies that were performed to show clinical validity of the test and warrant regulatory approval. The examples reviewed here should help with planning of clinical investigations and delivery of the clinical evidence required for the regulatory approval of potential methylation biomarker based IVD tests.

DNA Methylation Cancer Biomarkers: Translation to the Clinic

Carcinogenesis is accompanied by widespread DNA methylation changes within the cell. These changes are characterized by a globally hypomethylated genome with focal hypermethylation of numerous 5’-cytosine-phosphate-guanine-3’ (CpG) islands, often spanning gene promoters and first exons. Many of these epigenetic changes occur early in tumorigenesis and are highly pervasive across a tumor type. This allows DNA methylation cancer biomarkers to be suitable for early detection and also to have utility across a range of areas relevant to cancer detection and treatment. Such tests are also simple in construction, as only one or a few loci need to be targeted for good test coverage. These properties make cancer-associated DNA methylation changes very attractive for development of cancer biomarker tests with substantive clinical utility. Across the patient journey from initial detection, to treatment and then monitoring, there are several points where DNA methylation assays can inform clinical practice. Assays on surgically removed tumor tissue are useful to determine indicators of treatment resistance, prognostication of outcome, or to molecularly characterize, classify, and determine the tissue of origin of a tumor. Cancer-associated DNA methylation changes can also be detected with accuracy in the cell-free DNA present in blood, stool, urine, and other biosamples. Such tests hold great promise for the development of simple, economical, and highly specific cancer detection tests suitable for population-wide screening, with several successfully translated examples already. The ability of circulating tumor DNA liquid biopsy assays to monitor cancer in situ also allows for the ability to monitor response to therapy, to detect minimal residual disease and as an early biomarker for cancer recurrence. This review will summarize existing DNA methylation cancer biomarkers used in clinical practice across the application domains above, discuss what makes a suitable DNA methylation cancer biomarker, and identify barriers to translation. We discuss technical factors such as the analytical performance and product-market fit, factors that contribute to successful downstream investment, including geography, and how this impacts intellectual property, regulatory hurdles, and the future of the marketplace and healthcare system.

Rethinking active surveillance for prostate cancer in African American men

Active surveillance (AS) is a treatment modality for prostate cancer that aims to simultaneously avoid overtreatment and allow for the timely intervention of localized disease. AS has become the de facto standard of care for most men with low-risk prostate cancer. However, few African American (AA) men were included in the prospective observational cohorts that resulted in a paradigm shift in treatment recommendations from active intervention toward AS. It has been established that AA men have an increased prostate cancer incidence, higher baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values, more aggressive prostate cancer features, greater frequency of biochemical recurrence after treatment, and higher overall cancer-specific mortality compared to their Caucasian counterparts. As such, this has given many physicians pause before initiating AS for AA patients. In the following manuscript, we will review the available literature regarding AS, with a particular focus on AA men. The preponderance of evidence demonstrates that AS is as viable a management method for AA with low-risk prostate cancer as it is with other racial groups.