Suitability of PSA-detected localised prostate cancers for focal therapy: experience from the ProtecT study

The ProtecT trial: analysis of the patient cohort, baseline risk stratification and disease progression

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that the baseline clinico-pathological features of the men with localized prostate cancer (PCa) included in the ProtecT (Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment) trial who progressed (n = 198) at a 10-year median follow-up were different from those of men with stable disease (n = 1409).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We stratified the study participants at baseline according to risk of progression using clinical disease stage, pathological grade and PSA level, using Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

The findings showed that 34% of participants (n = 505) had intermediate- or high-risk PCa, and 66% (n = 973) had low-risk PCa. Of 198 participants who progressed, 101 (51%) had baseline International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group 1, 59 (30%) Grade Group 2, and 38 (19%) Grade Group 3 PCa, compared with 79%, 17% and 5%, respectively, for 1409 participants without progression (P < 0.001). In participants with progression, 38% and 62% had baseline low- and intermediate-/high-risk disease, compared with 69% and 31% of participants with stable disease (P < 0.001). Treatment received, age (65-69 vs 50-64 years), PSA level, Grade Group, clinical stage, risk group, number of positive cores, tumour length and perineural invasion were associated with time to progression (P ≤ 0.005). Men progressing after surgery (n = 19) were more likely to have a higher Grade Group and pathological stage at surgery, larger tumours, lymph node involvement and positive margins.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that one-third of the ProtecT cohort consists of people with intermediate-/high-risk disease, and the outcomes data at an average of 10 years' follow-up are generalizable beyond men with low-risk PCa.

Prostate focal therapy: the rule or exception?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate focal therapy has the potential to preserve urinary and sexual function while eliminating clinically significant cancer in a subset of men with low-volume, organ-confined prostate cancer. This systematic review aims to examine current evidence to determine the efficacy and safety of focal therapy for standard clinical application.

RECENT FINDINGS

Focal therapy reduces the rate of cancer progression and conversion to radical therapy in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. As a strategy, success in focal therapy is heavily dependent on the use of imaging and targeted biopsies. Despite advances in these areas, there remains a small but significant risk of under-detecting clinically significant cancer. Similarly, under-estimation of tumor volume may contribute to infield recurrences and close attention must be paid to the ablation margin. Although long-term oncological outcomes remain lacking, focal therapy has a low complication rate, minimal impact on urinary continence and a moderate impact on erectile function.

SUMMARY

With the appropriate expertise in imaging, targeted biopsy and targeted ablation, focal therapy is a good option in men with low-intermediate risk cancer who are willing to maximize their urinary and sexual function. However, close posttreatment surveillance and the possibility of conversion to whole gland therapy must be accepted.

Detection of Individual Prostate Cancer Foci via Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) undoubtedly affects the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer (CaP). However, clinicians need a better understanding of its accuracy and limitations in detecting individual CaP foci to optimize management.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the per-lesion detection rate for CaP foci by mpMRI and identify predictors of tumor detection.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We carried out a retrospective analysis of a prospectively managed database correlating lesion-specific results from mpMRI co-registered with whole-mount pathology (WMP) prostatectomy specimens from June 2010 to February 2018. Participants include 588 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven CaP undergoing 3-T mpMRI before radical prostatectomy at a single tertiary institution.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We measured mpMRI sensitivity in detecting individual CaP and clinically significant (any Gleason score ≥7) CaP foci and predictors of tumor detection using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The final analysis included 1213 pathologically confirmed tumor foci in 588 patients with primarily intermediate- (75%) or high-risk (12%) CaP. mpMRI detected 45% of all lesions (95% confidence interval [CI] 42-47%), including 65% of clinically significant lesions (95% CI 61-69%) and nearly 80% of high-grade tumors. Some 74% and 31% of missed solitary and multifocal tumors, respectively, were clinically significant. The majority of missed lesions were small (61.1% ≤1cm); 28.3% were between 1 and 2cm, and 10.4% were >2cm. mpMRI missed at least one clinically significant focus in 34% of patients overall, and in 45% of men with multifocal lesions. On multivariate analysis, smaller, low-grade, multifocal, nonindex tumors with lower prostate-specific antigen density were more likely to be missed. Limitations include selection bias in a prostatectomy cohort, lack of specificity data, an imperfect co-registration process, and uncertain clinical significance for undetected lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

mpMRI detects less than half of all and less than two-thirds of clinically significant CaP foci. The moderate per-lesion sensitivity and significant proportion of men with undetected tumor foci demonstrate the current limitations of mpMRI.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate before surgical removal for prostate cancer finds less than half of all individual prostate cancer tumors. Large, solitary, aggressive tumors are more likely to be visualized on imaging.

New advances in focal therapy for early stage prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Prostate focal therapy offers men the opportunity to achieve oncological control while preserving sexual and urinary function. The prerequisites for successful focal therapy are to accurately identify, localize and completely ablate the clinically significant cancer(s) within the prostate. We aim to evaluate the evidence for current and upcoming technologies that could shape the future of prostate cancer focal therapy in the next five years. Areas covered: Current literature on advances in patient selection using imaging, biopsy and biomarkers, ablation techniques and adjuvant treatments for focal therapy are summarized. A literature search of major databases was performed using the search terms 'focal therapy', 'focal ablation', 'partial ablation', 'targeted ablation', 'image guided therapy' and 'prostate cancer'. Expert commentary: Advanced radiological tools such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), multiparametric ultrasound (mpUS), prostate-specific-membrane-antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) represent a revolution in the ability to understand cancer function and biology. Advances in ablative technologies now provide a menu of modalities that can be rationalized based on lesion location, size and perhaps in the near future, pre-determined resistance to therapy. However, these need to be carefully studied to establish their safety and efficacy parameters. Adjuvant strategies to enhance focal ablation are under development.

Predicting high-grade cancer at ten-core prostate biopsy using four kallikrein markers measured in blood in the ProtecT study

Background:

Many men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in serum do not have aggressive prostate cancer and undergo unnecessary biopsy. Retrospective studies using cryopreserved serum suggest that four kallikrein markers can predict biopsy outcome.

Methods:

Free, intact and total PSA, and kallikrein-related peptidase 2 were measured in cryopreserved blood from 6129 men with elevated PSA (≥3.0ng/mL) participating in the prospective, randomized trial Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment. Marker levels from 4765 men providing anticoagulated plasma were incorporated into statistical models to predict any-grade and high-grade (Gleason score ≥7) prostate cancer at 10-core biopsy. The models were corrected for optimism by 10-fold cross validation and independently validated using markers measured in serum from 1364 men. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results:

The four kallikreins enhanced prostate cancer detection compared with PSA and age alone. Area under the curve (AUC) for the four kallikreins was 0.719 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.704 to 0.734) vs 0.634 (95% CI = 0.617 to 0.651, P < .001) for PSA and age alone for any-grade cancer, and 0.820 (95% CI = 0.802 to 0.838) vs 0.738 (95% CI = 0.716 to 0.761) for high-grade cancer. Using a 6% risk of high-grade cancer as an illustrative cutoff, for 1000 biopsied men with PSA levels of 3.0ng/mL or higher, the model would reduce the need for biopsy in 428 men, detect 119 high-grade cancers, and delay diagnosis of 14 of 133 high-grade cancers. Models exhibited excellent discrimination on independent validation among men with only serum samples available for analysis.

Conclusions:

A statistical model based on kallikrein markers was validated in a large prospective study and reduces unnecessary biopsies while delaying diagnosis of high-grade cancers in few men.

Future-proofing Gleason Grading: What to Call Gleason 6 Prostate Cancer?

At the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology meeting, changes to prostate cancer grading were discussed including new prognostic Gleason grade groups 1-5 representing Gleason scores of 3+3, 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10, respectively.

Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) is increasingly used in prostate cancer (CaP). Understanding the limitations of tumor detection, particularly in multifocal disease, is important in its clinical application.

OBJECTIVE

To determine predictors of CaP detection by mp-MRI as confirmed by whole-mount histopathology.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective study was performed of 122 consecutive men who underwent mp-MRI before radical prostatectomy at a single referral academic center. A genitourinary radiologist and pathologist collectively determined concordance.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The odds of tumor detection were calculated for clinical, MRI, and histopathologic variables using a multivariate logistic regression model.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The 122 patients had 283 unique histologically confirmed CaP tumor foci. Gleason score was 6 in 21 (17%), 7 in 88 (72%), and ≥8 in 13 (11%) patients. Of the 122 cases, 44 (36%) had solitary and 78 (64%) had multifocal tumors. Overall mp-MRI sensitivity for tumor detection was 47% (132/283), with increased sensitivity for larger (102/141 [72%] >1.0 cm), higher-grade (96/134 [72%] Gleason ≥7) tumors, and index tumors (98/122 [80%]). Index tumor status, size, and prostate weight were significant predictors of detection in a multivariate analysis, and multifocality did not adversely impact detection of index tumors. A prostatectomy population was necessary by design, which may limit the ability to generalize these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitivity for tumor detection increased with tumor size and grade. Index tumor status and tumor size were the strongest predictors of tumor detection, regardless of tumor focality. Some 80% of index tumors were detected, but nonindex tumor detection, even of high-grade lesions, was poor. These findings have important implications for focal therapy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated the ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to detect cancer in patients undergoing prostatectomy. We found that tumor size and grade were important predictors of tumor detection, and although cancer is often multifocal, MRI is often able to detect the worst focus of cancer.

Prebiopsy multiparametric 3T prostate MRI in patients with elevated PSA, normal digital rectal examination, and no previous biopsy

PURPOSE

To find the diagnostic accuracy of 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and mpMRI targeted transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy using visual coregistration (TB) in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA), normal digital rectal examination, and no previous biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-five patients at two institutions underwent mpMRI, consisting of anatomical T2 -weighted imaging (T2 W), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1) H-MRS), and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI), followed by TB in addition to 12 core systematic TRUS-guided biopsy (SB). Histopathological scorings of biopsy (n = 38) and prostatectomy (n = 17) specimens were used as the reference standard for calculation of diagnostic accuracy values. Clinically significant prostate cancer (SPCa) was defined as 3 mm core length of Gleason score 3+3 or any Gleason grade 4.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) values for the detection of SPCa on the sextant level for T2 W+DWI+(1) H-MRS+DCE-MRI were 72%, 89%, 85%, and 0.81, respectively. The corresponding values for T2 wi+DWI were 61%, 96%, 87%, and 0.79, respectively. The overall PCa detection rate per core in 53 patients was 21% (138 of 648 cores) for SB and 43% (33 of 77 cores) for TB (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Prebiopsy mpMRI is an accurate tool for PCa detection and biopsy targeting in patients with elevated PSA.

A networks method for ranking microRNA dysregulation in cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite the lack of agreement on their exact roles, it is known that miRNAs contribute to cancer progression. Many studies utilize methods to detect differential regulation of miRNA expression. It is prohibitively expensive to examine all potentially dysregulated miRNAs and traditionally, researchers have focused their efforts on the most extremely dysregulated miRNAs. These methods may overlook the contribution of less differentially expressed but more functionally relevant miRNAs. The purpose of this study was to outline a method that not only utilizes differential expression but ranks miRNAs based on the functional relevance of their targets. This work uses a networks based approach to determine the sum node degree for all experimentally verified miRNA targets to identify potential regulators of prostate cancer initiation, progression and metastasis.

RESULTS

Here, we present a method for identifying functionally relevant miRNAs that contribute to prostate cancer development. This paper shows that miRNAs preferentially regulate highly connected, central proteins within a protein-protein interaction network. Known targets of miRNAs differentially regulated during prostate cancer progression are enriched in pathways with known involvement in tumorigenesis. To demonstrate the applicability of our method, we utilized a unique model of prostate cancer progression to identify five miRNAs that may contribute to the oncogenic state of the cell. Three of these miRNAs have been shown by other studies to have a role in cancer but their exact role in prostate cancer remains undefined.

CONCLUSION

Developing methods to determine which miRNAs to carry forward into biological and biochemical analyses is important as traditional approaches often overlook miRNAs that contribute to oncogenesis. Our method applied to a model of prostate cancer progression was able to identify miRNAs with roles in prostate cancer development.

Prostate cancer tumour features on template prostate-mapping biopsies: implications for focal therapy

Background

Focal therapy is being offered as a viable alternative for men with localised prostate cancer (PCa), but it is unclear which men may be suitable.

Objective

To determine the proportion of men with localised PCa who are potentially suitable for focal therapy.

Design, setting, and participants

Our institutional transperineal template prostate-mapping (TTPM) biopsy registry of 377 men from 2006 to 2010 identified 291 consecutive men with no prior treatment.

Intervention

TTPM biopsies using a 5-mm sampling frame.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Suitability for focal therapy required the cancer to be (1) unifocal, (2) unilateral, (3) bilateral/bifocal with at least one neurovascular bundle avoided, or (4) bilateral/multifocal with one dominant index lesion and secondary lesions with Gleason ≤3 + 3 and cancer core involvement ≤3 mm. Binary logistic regression modelling was used to determine variables predictive for focal therapy suitability.

Results and limitations

The median age was 61 yr, and the median prostate-specific antigen was 6.8 ng/ml. The median total was 29 cores, with a median of 8 positive cores. Of 239 of 291 men with cancer, 29% (70 men), 60% (144 men), and 8% (20 men) had low-, intermediate-, and high-risk PCa, respectively. Ninety-two percent (220 men) were suitable for one form of focal therapy: hemiablation (22%, 53 men), unifocal ablation (31%, 73 men), bilateral/bifocal ablation (14%, 33 men), and index lesion ablation (26%, 61 men). Binary logistic regression modelling incorporating transrectal biopsy parameters showed no statistically significant predictive variable. When incorporating TTPM parameters, only T stage was a significant negative predictor for suitability (p = 0.001) (odds ratio: 0.001 [95% confidence interval, 0.000–0.048]). Limitations of the study include potential selection bias caused by tertiary referral practise and lack of long-term results on focal therapy efficacy.

Conclusions

Focal therapy requires an accurate tool to localise individual cancer lesions. When such a test, TTPM biopsy, was applied to men with low- and intermediate-risk PCa, most of the men were suitable for a tissue preservation strategy.

Multiparametric MR imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a validation cohort study with transperineal template prostate mapping as the reference standard

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of multiparametric (MP) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for prostate cancer detection by using transperineal template prostate mapping (TTPM) biopsies as the reference standard and to determine the potential ability of MP MR imaging to identify clinically significant prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional review board exemption was granted by the local research ethics committee for this retrospective study. Included were 64 men (mean age, 62 years [range, 40-76]; mean prostate-specific antigen, 8.2 ng/mL [8.2 μg/L] [range, 2.1-43 ng/mL]), 51 with biopsy-proved cancer and 13 suspected of having clinically significant cancer that was biopsy negative or without prior biopsy. MP MR imaging included T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging (1.5 T, pelvic phased-array coil). Three radiologists independently reviewed images and were blinded to results of biopsy. Two-by-two tables were derived by using sectors of analysis of four quadrants, two lobes, and one whole prostate. Primary target definition for clinically significant disease necessary to be present within a sector of analysis on TTPM for that sector to be deemed positive was set at Gleason score of 3+4 or more and/or cancer core length involvement of 4 mm or more. Sensitivity, negative predictive value, and negative likelihood ratio were calculated to determine ability of MP MR imaging to rule out cancer. Specificity, positive predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, accuracy (overall fraction correct), and area under receiver operating characteristic curves were also calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight percent (71 of 256) of sectors had clinically significant cancer by primary endpoint definition. For primary endpoint definition (≥ 4 mm and/or Gleason score ≥ 3+4), sensitivity, negative predictive value, and negative likelihood ratios were 58%-73%, 84%-89%, and 0.3-0.5, respectively. Specificity, positive predictive value, and positive likelihood ratios were 71%-84%, 49%-63%, and 2.-3.44, respectively. Area under the curve values were 0.73-0.84.

CONCLUSION

Results of this study indicate that MP MR imaging has a high negative predictive value to rule out clinically significant prostate cancer and may potentially have clinical use in diagnostic pathways of men at risk.

The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review

CONTEXT

The incidence of localised prostate cancer is increasing worldwide. In light of recent evidence, current, radical, whole-gland treatments for organ-confined disease have being questioned with respect to their side effects, cancer control, and cost. Focal therapy may be an effective alternative strategy.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the existing literature on baseline characteristics of the target population; preoperative evaluation to localise disease; and perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes following focal therapy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Medline (through PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Review databases were searched from inception to 31 October 2012. In addition, registered but not yet published trials were retrieved. Studies evaluating tissue-preserving therapies in men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer in the primary or salvage setting were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 2350 cases were treated to date across 30 studies. Most studies were retrospective with variable standards of reporting, although there was an increasing number of prospective registered trials. Focal therapy was mainly delivered to men with low and intermediate disease, although some high-risk cases were treated that had known, unilateral, significant cancer. In most of the cases, biopsy findings were correlated to specific preoperative imaging, such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging or Doppler ultrasound to determine eligibility. Follow-up varied between 0 and 11.1 yr. In treatment-naïve prostates, pad-free continence ranged from 95% to 100%, erectile function ranged from 54% to 100%, and absence of clinically significant cancer ranged from 83% to 100%. In focal salvage cases for radiotherapy failure, the same outcomes were achieved in 87.2-100%, 29-40%, and 92% of cases, respectively. Biochemical disease-free survival was reported using a number of definitions that were not validated in the focal-therapy setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review highlights that, when focal therapy is delivered with intention to treat, the perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes are encouraging within a short- to medium-term follow-up. Focal therapy is a strategy by which the overtreatment burden of the current prostate cancer pathway could be reduced, but robust comparative effectiveness studies are now required.