Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a narrative review of clinical guidelines

[68Ga]Ga‑PSMA‑617 PET-based radiomics model to identify candidates for active surveillance amongst patients with GGG 1-2 prostate cancer at biopsy

PURPOSE

To develop a radiomics-based model using [68Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT to predict postoperative adverse pathology (AP) in patients with biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG) 1-2 prostate cancer (PCa), assisting in the selection of patients for active surveillance (AS).

METHODS

A total of 75 men with biopsy GGG 1-2 PCa who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) were enrolled. The patients were randomly divided into a training group (70%) and a testing group (30%). Radiomics features of entire prostate were extracted from the [68Ga]Ga-PSMA PET scans and selected using the minimum redundancy maximum relevance algorithm and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to construct the prediction models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curve were employed to evaluate the diagnostic value, clinical utility, and predictive accuracy of the models, respectively.

RESULTS

Among the 75 patients, 30 had AP confirmed by RP. The clinical model showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.821 (0.695-0.947) in the training set and 0.795 (0.603-0.987) in the testing set. The radiomics model achieved AUC values of 0.830 (0.720-0.941) in the training set and 0.829 (0.624-1.000) in the testing set. The combined model, which incorporated the Radiomics score (Radscore) and free prostate-specific antigen (FPSA)/total prostate-specific antigen (TPSA), demonstrated higher diagnostic efficacy than both the clinical and radiomics models, with AUC values of 0.875 (0.780-0.970) in the training set and 0.872 (0.678-1.000) in the testing set. DCA showed that the net benefits of the combined model and radiomics model exceeded those of the clinical model.

CONCLUSION

The combined model shows potential in stratifying men with biopsy GGG 1-2 PCa based on the presence of AP at final pathology and outperforms models based solely on clinical or radiomics features. It may be expected to aid urologists in better selecting suitable patients for AS.

Decision-making experiences of patients and partners opting for active surveillance in esophageal cancer treatment

OBJECTIVES

This study explored the decision-making experiences of patients and their partners or primary caregiver who opted for experimental active surveillance (instead of standard surgery) for the treatment of esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Seventeen couples participated. Semi-structured interviews were conducted on couples' joint experiences as well as their individual experiences. Preferred and perceived role in the treatment decision-making process was assessed using the adjusted version of the Control Preferences Scale, and perceived influence on the treatment decision was measured using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Couples reflected on the decision-making process as a positive collaboration, where patients retain their autonomy by making the final decision, and partners offer emotional support. Couples reported about an overwhelming amount and sometimes conflicting information about treatments among different hospitals and healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients often involve their partner in decision-making, which they report to have enhanced their ability to cope with the disease. The amount and sometimes conflicting information during the decision-making process provide opportunities for improvement.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Couples can benefit from an overview of what they can expect during treatment course. If active surveillance becomes an established treatment option in the future, provision of such overviews and consistent information should become more streamlined.

Nurses and Climate Change: A Narrative Review of Nursing Associations' Recommendations for Integrating Climate Change Mitigation Strategies

BACKGROUND

According to the World Health Organization, climate change is the greatest challenge of the twenty-first century. It is already affecting the health of many Canadians through extreme heat, wildfires and the expansion of zoonotic diseases. As trusted professionals, nurses are in favourable position to take action on climate change.

PURPOSE

To document the recommendations issued by Quebec, Canadian, American and international nursing associations regarding nursing practices that address climate change or environmental issues.

METHODS

This narrative review was conducted by establishing a list of environmental and general nursing associations in the geographical areas of interest through Google searches as well as by retrieving documents about climate change or environmental issues published by these organizations on their websites. Data related to the documents' characteristics and recommended nursing roles were then extracted.

RESULTS

The review identified 13 nurses' organizations and 20 documents describing 37 recommendations for nurses in seven socioecological areas: individual, patient-focused, workplace, nursing associations, public health organizations, political and education.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a gap between the breadth of roles that nurses may be called upon to play in addressing climate change and the degree to which relevant organizations are prepared to create the required conditions for them to do so. Several lessons emerged, including that the urgency of the climate crisis requires clear guidelines on how nurses can integrate climate change and its resultant health concerns into practice through nurses' associations, education and bottom-up nursing innovations. Funding is required for such initiatives, which must also prioritize health inequalities.

PRADclass: Hybrid Gleason Grade-Informed Computational Strategy Identifies Consensus Biomarker Features Predictive of Aggressive Prostate Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Prostate adenocarcinoma (PRAD) is a common cancer diagnosis among men globally, yet large gaps in our knowledge persist with respect to the molecular bases of its progression and aggression. It is mostly indolent and slow-growing, but aggressive prostate cancers need to be recognized early for optimising treatment, with a view to reducing mortality.

METHODS

Based on TCGA transcriptomic data pertaining to PRAD and the associated clinical metadata, we determined the sample Gleason grade, and used it to execute: (i) Gleason-grade wise linear modeling, followed by five contrasts against controls and ten contrasts between grades; and (ii) Gleason-grade wise network modeling via weighted gene correlation network analysis (WGCNA). Candidate biomarkers were obtained from the above analysis and the consensus found. The consensus biomarkers were used as the feature space to train ML models for classifying a sample as benign, indolent or aggressive.

RESULTS

The statistical modeling yielded 77 Gleason grade-salient genes while the WGCNA algorithm yielded 1003 trait-specific key genes in grade-wise significant modules. Consensus analysis of the two approaches identified two genes in Grade-1 (SLC43A1 and PHGR1), 26 genes in Grade-4 (including LOC100128675, PPP1R3C, NECAB1, UBXN10, SERPINA5, CLU, RASL12, DGKG, FHL1, NCAM1, and CEND1), and seven genes in Grade-5 (CBX2, DPYS, FAM72B, SHCBP1, TMEM132A, TPX2, UBE2C). A RandomForest model trained and optimized on these 35 biomarkers for the ternary classification problem yielded a balanced accuracy ∼ 86% on external validation.

CONCLUSIONS

The consensus of multiple parallel computational strategies has unmasked candidate Gleason grade-specific biomarkers. PRADclass, a validated AI model featurizing these biomarkers achieved good performance, and could be trialed to predict the differentiation of prostate cancers. PRADclass is available for academic use at: https://apalania.shinyapps.io/pradclass (online) and https://github.com/apalania/pradclass (command-line interface).

Analysis of active surveillance uptake for localized prostate cancer in Quebec in 2016: A Canadian bicentric study and comparison with 2010 data

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a primary management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients. We aimed to assess AS uptake over a 1-year snapshot throughout Quebec and to compare it to 2010 multicentric Canadian data.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review and data collection was performed in 1 academic and 2 non-academic community centres from Quebec, among men identified in 2016 with localized T1c-T2c PC on biopsy, fulfilling NCCN criteria of low-risk (LR)-PC, including very-low-risk (VLR) and non-VLR-PC, and favourable-intermediate risk (FIR)-PC. AS adherence was defined when chosen as initial strategy, without any radical treatment within 6 months.

RESULTS

Overall, 259 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria with 50.2% of VLR-PC patients. At 6 months, 81% patients in the LR group and 65% in the FIR group were considered as adherent to AS, in both centres, but with an increased use of AS in the community centres compared to 2010 data. The rates of AS maintenance decreased at 12 months to respectively 69% and 58%. Among the VLR group, the rate of initiation was 98% and decreased to 85% at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the majority of low-risk PC patients indeed initiated an AS in 2016, with even a greater proportion of VLR-PC patients compared to 2010. This ideal strategy should be encouraged and improved at 12 months, and assessed with recent data and longer follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

The PRECISE Recommendations for Prostate MRI in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Critical Review

The Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations were published in 2016 to standardize the reporting of MRI examinations performed to assess for disease progression in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer. Although a limited number of studies have reported outcomes from use of PRECISE in clinical practice, the available studies have demonstrated PRECISE to have high pooled NPV but low pooled PPV for predicting progression. Our experience in using PRECISE in clinical practice at two teaching hospitals has highlighted issues with its application and areas requiring clarification. This Clinical Perspective critically appraises PRECISE on the basis of this experience, focusing on the system's key advantages and disadvantages and exploring potential changes to improve the system's utility. These changes include consideration of image quality when applying PRECISE scoring, incorporation of quantitative thresholds for disease progression, adoption of a PRECISE 3F sub-category for progression not qualifying as substantial, and comparisons with both the baseline and most recent prior examinations. Items requiring clarification include derivation of a patient-level score in patients with multiple lesions, intended application of PRECISE score 5 (i.e., if requiring development of disease that is no longer organ-confined), and categorization of new lesions in patients with prior MRI-invisible disease.

The impact of AirSeal® on complications and pain management during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a single-tertiary center study

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare perioperative outcomes, post-operative complications, and opioid use between AirSeal® and non-AirSeal® robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data on 326 patients who underwent elective RARP at our institution either with or without AirSeal®. The first 60 cases were excluded accounting for the institutions' learning curve of RARP. Patient demographics, oncologic, pathologic, and surgical characteristics between AirSeal® and non-AirSeal® cases were compared. Furthermore, outcomes of interest including operative time, length of stay, morbidity, and opioid use for pain management were compared between the two groups. Univariate linear and logistic regression models were developed.

RESULTS

The AirSeal® group consisted of 125 (38.3%) patients while the non-AirSeal® group consisted of 201 (61.7%) patients. No statistically significant difference was seen in terms of patient demographics, oncologic characteristics, surgical characteristics, and pathologic characteristics between the two groups. In addition, univariate linear regression showed that RARP with AirSeal® displayed shorter operative times by 12.3 min and a shorter length of hospital stay by 0.5 days compared to the non-AirSeal® group (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the AirSeal® group witnessed lower odds of Clavien-Dindo (CVD) Class > 2 complications (OR = 0.102) and a lower need for opioid use (OR = 0.49) compared to the non-AirSeal® group (p < 0.022).

CONCLUSION

RARP using AirSeal® is associated with shorter operative times, shorter length of hospital stays, lower odds of CVD > 2 complications, and lower odds of opioid use with respect to non-AirSeal® RARP. The efficacy and cost effectiveness of using the AirSeal® system during RARP should be further studied and evaluated by clinical trials.

Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scoring to Predict Clinical Outcomes in Active Surveillance for Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether radiological change on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging scored using the Prostate Cancer Radiological Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) Scoring system predicts grade reclassification (GR) at surveillance biopsy in men on active surveillance (AS) with Grade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of 255 men with low-risk PCa on AS with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-informed diagnostic and confirmatory biopsies and studied the subset who had surveillance biopsies (n = 163) within 6months of an interval MRI.

RESULTS

We studied 309 PRECISE scores in 255 men. 14% demonstrated radiological progression (PRECISE 4-5) on interval MRI performed within 24months, compared to 34% of those whose interval MRI was performed at a >3-year interval (P = .002). 28% (46/163) of men undergoing surveillance biopsy experienced GR to ≥ GG2 PCa. There was no significant increase in the rate of GR with increasing PRECISE score (PRECISE 1-2: 24%, PRECISE 3: 23%, PRECISE 4-5: 38%; P = .11). There was a significant increase in the rate of GR with increasing PI-RADS score (P < .05). On multivariable analysis, a PI-RADS score of 4-5 was significantly associated with GR compared to men who had a highest PI-RADS ≤3 (OR=1.98 [95% CI: 1.45-3.09, P = .01]).

CONCLUSION

In a low-risk AS cohort with limited follow-up, a patient's highest PI-RADS rather than their PRECISE score on interval MRI was predictive of GR on surveillance biopsy.

Contemporary Review of Multimodality Imaging of the Prostate Gland

Tissue changes and the enlargement of the prostate, whether benign or malignant, are among the most common groups of diseases that affect men and can have significant impacts on length and quality of life. The prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) increases significantly with age and affects nearly all men as they grow older. Other than skin cancers, prostate cancer is the most common cancer among men in the United States. Imaging is an essential component in the diagnosis and management of these conditions. Multiple modalities are available for prostate imaging, including several novel imaging modalities that have changed the landscape of prostate imaging in recent years. This review will cover the data relating to commonly used standard-of-care prostate imaging modalities, advances in newer technologies, and newer standards that impact prostate gland imaging.

The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance in active surveillance of a low-risk prostate cancer cohort from clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance (AS) is considered a suitable management practice for those patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). At present, however, the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in AS protocols has not yet been clearly established.

OUTCOMES

To determine the role of mpMRI and its ability to detect significant prostate cancer (SigPCa) in PCa patients enrolled in AS protocols.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

There were 229 patients enrolled in an AS protocol between 2011 and 2020 at Reina Sofía University Hospital. MRI interpretation was based on PIRADS v.1 or v.2/2.1 classification. Demographics, clinical, and analytical data were collected and analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for mpMRI in different scenarios. We defined SigPCa and reclassification/progression as a Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4, a clinical stage ≥T2b, or an increase in PCa volume. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to estimate progression-free survival time.

RESULTS

Median age was 69.02 (±7.73) at diagnosis, with a 0.15 (±0.08) PSA density (PSAD). Eighty-six patients were reclassified after confirmatory biopsy, with a suspicious mpMRI an indication for a clear reclassification and risk-predictor factor in disease progression (p < 0.05). During follow-up, 46 patients were changed from AS to active treatment mainly due to disease progression. Ninety patients underwent ≥2mpMRI during follow-up, with a median follow-up of 29 (15-49) months. Thirty-four patients had a baseline suspicious mpMRI (at diagnostic or confirmatory biopsy): 14 patients with a PIRADS 3 and 20 patients with ≥PIRADS 4. From 14 patients with a PIRADS 3 baseline mpMRI, 29% progressed radiologically, with a 50% progression rate versus 10% (1/10 patients) for those with similar or decreased mpMRI risk. Of the 56 patients with a non-suspicious baseline mpMRI (PIRADS < 2), 14 patients (25%) had an increased degree of radiological suspicion, with a detection rate of SigPCa of 29%. The mpMRI NPV during follow-up was 0.91.

CONCLUSION

A suspicious mpMRI increases the reclassification and disease progression risk during follow-up and plays an important role in monitoring biopsies. In addition, a high NPV at mpMRI follow-up can help to decrease the need to monitor biopsies during AS.

Prospective Implementation and Early Outcomes of a Risk-stratified Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Follow-up Protocol

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is a major management option for men with early prostate cancer. Current guidelines however advocate identical AS follow-up for all without considering different disease trajectories. We previously proposed a pragmatic three-tier STRATified CANcer Surveillance (STRATCANS) follow-up strategy based on different progression risks from clinic-pathological and imaging features.

Objective

To report early outcomes from the implementation of the STRATCANS protocol in our centre.

Design setting and participants

Men on AS were enrolled into a prospective stratified follow-up programme.

Intervention

Three tiers of increasing follow-up intensity based on National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG) 1 or 2, prostate-specific antigen density, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Likert score at entry.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Rates of progression to CPG ≥3, any pathological progression, AS attrition, and patient choice for treatment were assessed. Differences in progression were compared with chi-square statistics.

Results and limitations

Data from 156 men (median age 67.3 yr) were analysed. Of these, 38.4% had CPG2 disease and 27.5% had grade group 2 disease at diagnosis. The median time on AS was 4 yr (interquartile range 3.2-4.9) and 1.5 yr on STRATCANS. Overall, 135/156 (86.5%) men remained on AS or converted to watchful waiting and 6/156 (3.8%) stopped AS by choice by the end of the evaluation period. Of the 156 patients, 66 (42.3%) were allocated to STRATCANS 1 (least intense follow-up), 61 (39.1%) to STRATCANS 2, and 29 (18.6%) to STRATCANS 3 (highest intensity). By increasing STRATCANS tier, progression rates to CPG ≥3 and any progression events were 0% and 4.6%, 3.4% and 8.6%, and 7.4% and 22.2%, respectively (p = 0.019). Modelling resource usage suggested potential reductions in appointments by 22% and MRI by 42% compared with current NICE guideline recommendations (first 12 months of AS). The study is limited by short follow-up, a relatively small cohort, and being single centre.

Conclusions

A simple risk-tiered AS strategy is possible with early outcomes supporting stratified follow-up intensity. STRATCANS implementation could de-escalate follow-up in men at a low risk of progression while husbanding resources for those who need closer follow-up.

Patient summary

We report a practical way to personalise follow-up for men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Our method may allow reductions in the follow-up burden for men at a low risk of disease change while maintaining vigilance for those at a higher risk.

Challenges to Recruiting Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer in Clinical Chemoprevention Trials

Clinical trials play a critical role in evidence-based medicine, when rigorous scientific methodology is utilized to discover and test the effectiveness and safety of new drugs to prevent or cure diseases, including cancer. Participation in clinical trials thus becomes key to successful completion of these trials. Although it is estimated that >70% of Americans are inclined to participate in clinical trials, less than 5% of adult cancer patients participate in clinical trials. There is thus a large gap between those inclined to participate in clinical trials and actual participation in clinical trials. As with trials targeting men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS), where the target population is mostly over 50 years of age, others have observed several challenges with recruitment and accrual in clinical trials. The participation rate is currently unavailable for men on primary and secondary chemoprevention trials. Additionally, with unanticipated environmental factors such as a pandemic or other natural emergencies that may severely impact the economy, personal property, travel and person-to person contact for study-related procedures, there is a need to continuously identify these challenges and determine solutions to recruitment barriers in chemoprevention trials to ensure timely completion of early phase trials. Recent studies regarding the impact of the pandemic on clinical trial recruitment have shown that cancer prevention trials were relatively more negatively impacted compared to cancer treatment trials. The goal of this manuscript is to review our experience in continuously evaluating the protocol and patient level challenges to recruiting subjects on AS for PCa in this cancer chemoprevention trial conducted at the Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC) and report the contemporary strategies that we are utilizing to continue to recruit subjects in this trial. We provide data from our current trial as an example while discussing future strategies to improve overall clinical trial recruitment. These strategies can inform future design of contemporary cancer chemoprevention trials and, additionally, better select, focus and invest in strategies that are the most productive and efficient for recruiting target populations.

Modern Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review

The use of PSA screening has led to downstaging and downgrading of prostate cancer at diagnosis, increasing detection of indolent disease. Active surveillance aims to reduce over-treatment by delaying or avoiding radical treatment and its associated morbidity. However, there is not a consensus on the selection criteria and monitoring schedules that should be used. This article aims to summarize the evidence supporting the safety of active surveillance, the current selection criteria recommended and in use, the incidence of active surveillance, barriers existing to its uptake and future developments in patient selection.

Social ecological influences on treatment decision-making in men diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

Individuals diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer (PCa) face a difficult decision between active surveillance (AS) and definitive treatment. We aimed to explore perceived influences on treatment decision-making from the patient and partner's perspectives.

METHODS

Patients (and partners) who met AS criteria and had chosen their treatment were recruited. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted via telephone to explore experiences of diagnosis, impact on patient lifestyle, experiences with physicians, treatment preferences/choice, treatment information understanding and needs, and overall decision-making process. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using Reflexive Thematic Analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four male patients (18 chose AS) and 12 female partners participated. Five themes relating to social-ecological influences on treatment choice were identified: (1) partner support and direct influence on patient treatment choice, (2) patient and partner vicarious experiences may influence treatment decisions, (3) the influence of the patient's life circumstances, (4) disclosing to wider social networks: friends, family, and co-workers, and (5) the importance of a good relationship and experience with physicians. Additionally, two themes were identified relating to information patients and partners received about the treatment options during their decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of individual and social influences on treatment decision-making were reported. Physicians providing treatment recommendations should consider and discuss the patient and partner's existing beliefs and treatment preferences and encourage shared decision-making. Further research on treatment decision-making of partnered and non-partnered PCa patients is required. We recommend research considers social ecological factors across the personal, interpersonal, community, and policy levels.

Risk of progression following a negative biopsy in prostate cancer active surveillance

BACKGROUND

Currently, follow-up protocols are applied equally to men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) regardless of findings at their initial follow-up biopsy. To determine whether less intensive follow-up is suitable following negative biopsy findings, we assessed the risk of converting to active treatment, any subsequent upgrading, volume progression (>33% positive cores), and serious upgrading (grade group >2) for negative compared with positive findings on initial follow-up biopsy.

METHODS

13,161 men from 24 centres participating in the Global Action Plan Active Surveillance Prostate Cancer [GAP3] consortium database, with baseline grade group ≤2, PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL, cT-stage 1-2, diagnosed after 1995, and ≥1 follow-up biopsy, were included in this study. Risk of converting to treatment was assessed using multivariable mixed-effects survival regression. Odds of volume progression, any upgrading and serious upgrading were assessed using mix-effects binary logistic regression for men with ≥2 surveillance biopsies.

RESULTS

27% of the cohort (n = 3590) had no evidence of PCa at their initial biopsy. Over 50% of subsequent biopsies in this group were also negative. A negative initial biopsy was associated with lower risk of conversion (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.49), subsequent upgrading (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.52; 95%CI: 0.45-0.62) and serious upgrading (OR: 0.74; 95%CI: 0.59-92). Radiological progression was not assessed due to limited imaging data.

CONCLUSION

Despite heterogeneity in follow-up schedules, findings from this global study indicated reduced risk of converting to treatment, volume progression, any upgrading and serious upgrading among men whose initial biopsy findings were negative compared with positive. Given the low risk of progression and high likelihood of further negative biopsy findings, consideration should be given to decreasing follow-up intensity for this group to reduce unnecessary invasive biopsies.

Effects of Green Tea Catechins on Prostate Cancer Chemoprevention: The Role of the Gut Microbiome

Accumulating evidence supports green tea catechins (GTCs) in chemoprevention for prostate cancer (PCa), a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality among men. GTCs include (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate, which may modulate the molecular pathways implicated in prostate carcinogenesis. Prior studies of GTCs suggested that they are bioavailable, safe, and effective for modulating clinical and biological markers implicated in prostate carcinogenesis. GTCs may be of particular benefit to those with low-grade PCas typically managed with careful monitoring via active surveillance (AS). Though AS is recommended, it has limitations including potential under-grading, variations in eligibility, and anxiety reported by men while on AS. Secondary chemoprevention of low-grade PCas using GTCs may help address these limitations. When administrated orally, the gut microbiome enzymatically transforms GTC structure, altering its bioavailability, bioactivity, and toxicity. In addition to xenobiotic metabolism, the gut microbiome has multiple other physiological effects potentially involved in PCa progression, including regulating inflammation, hormones, and other known/unknown pathways. Therefore, it is important to consider not only the independent roles of GTCs and the gut microbiome in the context of PCa chemoprevention, but how gut microbes may relate to individual responses to GTCs, which, in turn, can enhance clinical decision-making.

Promoting the use of the PRECISE score for prostate MRI during active surveillance: results from the ESOR Nicholas Gourtsoyiannis teaching fellowship

Objectives

The PRECISE criteria for serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate during active surveillance recommend the use of a dedicated scoring system (PRECISE score) to assess the likelihood of clinically significant radiological change. This pilot study assesses the effect of an interactive teaching course on prostate MRI during active surveillance in assessing radiological change in serial imaging.

Methods

Eleven radiology fellows and registrars with different experience in prostate MRI reading participated in a dedicated teaching course where they initially evaluated radiological change (based on their previous training in prostate MRI reading) independently in fifteen patients on active surveillance (baseline and follow-up scan), and then attended a lecture on the PRECISE score. The initial scans were reviewed for teaching purposes and afterwards the participants re-assessed the degree of radiological change in a new set of images (from fifteen different patients) applying the PRECISE score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed. Confirmatory biopsies and PRECISE scores given in consensus by two radiologists (involved in the original draft of the PRECISE score) were the reference standard.

Results

There was a significant improvement in the average area under the curve (AUC) for the assessment of radiological change from baseline (AUC: 0.60 [Confidence Intervals: 0.51–0.69] to post-teaching (AUC: 0.77 [0.70–0.84]). This was an improvement of 0.17 [0.016–0.28] (p = 0.004).

Conclusions

A dedicated teaching course on the use of the PRECISE score improves the accuracy in the assessment of radiological change in serial MRI of the prostate.

[Intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with exclusive external irradiation: Focus on anatomical sites of recurrence in two French trials]

PURPOSE

Retrospective description of anatomical sites of relapse based on (18F)-choline PET-CT, (68Ga)-prostatic specific-membrane antigen PET-CT, bone scan, and prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From two French prospective cohorts, patients treated with exclusive radiotherapy for an intermediate-risk cancer were identified during their follow-ups. They were included if they presented a rising of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) associated with the realization of an imaging showing the sites of recurrences.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty-three patients were included. After a median follow-up of 76 months (interquartile range [IQR] 67-95), 65 patients had biochemical recurrence and positive imaging. The median nadir PSA was 0.6ng/mL and the median PSA at recurrence was 3.4ng/mL. A single lesion was found in 48% of cases, 2 to 4 lesions in 43% of cases and more than 4 lesions in 9% of cases. The sites of relapse identified were prostate (37/65), prostate only (19/65), seminal vesicles (9/65) Pelvic nodes (35/65), extrapelvic nodes (15/65) and bone (13/65).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of relapses presented as a single lesion localized in the pelvis.

Outcomes of partial gland ablation using high intensity focused ultrasound for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the clinical and oncological outcomes of partial gland ablation (PGA) using high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) technique for the clinically unilateral prostate cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis for the 163 patients who treated by PGA for clinically unilateral prostate cancer. The PGA was performed using Focal one system with concurrent trans-urethral prostatectomy. The oncological and functional outcomes were evaluated as well as risk factors for remnant disease after PGA. Clinically significant cancer was defined as grade group ≥2.

RESULTS

Among the entire subjects, grade group 2 or greater was present at pre-treatment biopsy in 76.7%. Median follow-up time was 17 months and 60.1% of total subjects had follow-up biopsy at postoperative 1 year. There were 25 subjects (24.2%) with any cancer and 13 subjects (12.6%) with CS cancer at the follow-up biopsy. The preoperative age and number of positive cores at preoperative biopsy were significantly associated with positive results at follow-up biopsy. Incontinence which requires 2 or more pads per day was observed at 4 subjects (2.5%) postoperatively. There were no subjects who needed intensive care or experienced rectal complications.

CONCLUSION

The PGA with HIFU was safe and showed good preservation of functional outcomes as well as satisfactory oncological control. The remnant disease was observed in the 24.5% of patients who underwent follow-up biopsy in the present study. Thus, further prospective study is needed to evaluate oncological and functional outcomes of PGA with HIFU more accurately.

Trends in the Management of Localized Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma in the United States (2000-2018)

Background: In response to evidence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC), the 2009 and 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) adult guidelines recommended less extensive surgery (lobectomy vs. total thyroidectomy) and more restricted use of postsurgical radioactive iodine (RAI) in management of PTC at low risk of recurrence. In 2015, active surveillance was suggested as a viable option for some <1-cm PTCs, or microcarcinomas. The 2015 ATA pediatric guidelines similarly shifted toward more restricted use of RAI for low-risk PTCs. The impact of these recommendations on low-risk adult and pediatric PTC management remains unclear, particularly after 2015. Methods: Using data from 18 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) U.S. registries (2000-2018), we described time trends in reported first-course treatment (total thyroidectomy alone, total thyroidectomy+RAI, lobectomy, no surgery, and other/unknown) for 105,483 patients diagnosed with first primary localized PTC (without nodal/distant metastases), overall and by demographic and tumor characteristics. Results: The declining use of RAI represented the most pronounced change in management of PTCs <4 cm (44-18% during the period 2006-2018), including microcarcinomas (26-6% during the period 2007-2018). In parallel, an increasing proportion of PTCs were managed with total thyroidectomy alone (35-54% during the period 2000-2018), while more subtle changes were observed for lobectomy (declining from 23% to 17% during the period 2000-2006, stabilizing, and then rising from 17% to 24% during the period 2015-2018). Use of nonsurgical management did not meaningfully change over time, impacting <1% of microcarcinomas annually during the period 2000-2018. Similar treatment trends were observed by sex, age, race/ethnicity, metropolitan vs. nonmetropolitan residence, and insurance status. For pediatric patients (<20 years), use of RAI peaked in 2009 (59%), then decreased markedly to 11% (2018), while use of total thyroidectomy alone and, to a lesser extent, lobectomy increased. No changing treatment trends were observed for ≥4-cm PTCs. Conclusions: The declining use of RAI in management of low-risk adult and pediatric PTC is consistent with changing recommendations from the ATA practice guidelines. Post-2015 trends in use of lobectomy and nonsurgical management of low-risk PTCs, particularly microcarcinomas, were more subtle than expected; however, these trends may change as evidence regarding their safety continues to emerge.

High expression of NPM1 via the Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway might predict poor prognosis for patients with prostate adenocarcinoma

Prostate adenocarcinoma (PRAD) occurs only in males and has a higher incidence rate than other cancers. NPM1 is a nucleocytoplasmic shuttling protein that participates in the development of multiple tumours. The aim of this research was to explore the effect of the upregulation or downregulation of the NPM1 protein on the malignancy of prostate cancer and its possible signalling pathway. Prostate adenocarcinoma cell lines were used in this study, including RWPE-1, PC3, LNCap, and 22RV1 cells. Our research revealed that NPM1 was widely expressed in the PRAD cell lines, as determined by Western blotting, and that the levels of NPM1 protein were positively correlated with the degree of malignancy of the PRAD cell lines. Through interference and overexpression experiments, we found that PC3 cells growth was inhibited after NPM1 knockdown and that this inhibition was partly reversed by CTNNB1 overexpression; in contrast, PC3 cells growth was promoted after NPM1 overexpression, and this promotion was partly reversed by CTNNB1 knockdown, suggesting that NPM1 and CTNNB1 play important roles in the progression of prostate cancer cells via the Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway. NPM1 may serve as an important biomarker and candidate therapeutic for patients with prostate cancer.

Systematic Review of Active Surveillance for Clinically Localised Prostate Cancer to Develop Recommendations Regarding Inclusion of Intermediate-risk Disease, Biopsy Characteristics at Inclusion and Monitoring, and Surveillance Repeat Biopsy Strategy

CONTEXT

There is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate criteria for recruitment, monitoring, and reclassification in active surveillance (AS) protocols for localised prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

To perform a qualitative systematic review (SR) to issue recommendations regarding inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, biopsy characteristics at inclusion and monitoring, and repeat biopsy strategy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A protocol-driven, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-adhering SR incorporating AS protocols published from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were criteria for inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, monitoring, reclassification, and repeat biopsy strategies (per protocol and/or triggered). Clinical effectiveness data were not assessed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Of the 17 011 articles identified, 333 studies incorporating 375 AS protocols, recruiting 264 852 patients, were included. Only a minority of protocols included the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for recruitment (n = 17), follow-up (n = 47), and reclassification (n = 26). More than 50% of protocols included patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, whilst 44.1% of protocols excluded low-risk patients with more than three positive cores, and 39% of protocols excluded patients with core involvement (CI) >50% per core. Of the protocols, ≥80% mandated a confirmatory transrectal ultrasound biopsy; 72% (n = 189) of protocols mandated per-protocol repeat biopsies, with 20% performing this annually and 25% every 2 yr. Only 27 protocols (10.3%) mandated triggered biopsies, with 74% of these protocols defining progression or changes on MRI as triggers for repeat biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

For AS protocols in which the use of MRI is not mandatory or absent, we recommend the following: (1) AS can be considered in patients with low-volume International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 (three or fewer positive cores and cancer involvement ≤50% CI per core) or another single element of intermediate-risk disease, and patients with ISUP 3 should be excluded; (2) per-protocol confirmatory prostate biopsies should be performed within 2 yr, and per-protocol surveillance repeat biopsies should be performed at least once every 3 yr for the first 10 yr; and (3) for patients with low-volume, low-risk disease at recruitment, if repeat systematic biopsies reveal more than three positive cores or maximum CI >50% per core, they should be monitored closely for evidence of adverse features (eg, upgrading); patients with ISUP 2 disease with increased core positivity and/or CI to similar thresholds should be reclassified.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We examined the literature to issue new recommendations on active surveillance (AS) for managing localised prostate cancer. The recommendations include setting criteria for including men with more aggressive disease (intermediate-risk disease), setting thresholds for close monitoring of men with low-risk but more extensive disease, and determining when to perform repeat biopsies (within 2 yr and 3 yearly thereafter).

Prostate Cancer Patients Under Active Surveillance with a Suspicious Magnetic Resonance Imaging Finding Are at Increased Risk of Needing Treatment: Results of the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) Consortium

BACKGROUND

The inclusion criterion for active surveillance (AS) is low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The predictive value of the presence of a suspicious lesion at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the time of inclusion is insufficiently known.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the percentage of patients needing active treatment stratified by the presence or absence of a suspicious lesion at baseline MRI.

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis of the data from the multicentric AS GAP3 Consortium database was conducted. The inclusion criteria were men with grade group (GG) 1 or GG 2 prostate cancer combined with prostate-specific antigen <20 ng/ml. We selected a subgroup of patients who had MRI at baseline and for whom MRI results and targeted biopsies were used for AS eligibility. Suspicious MRI was defined as an MRI lesion with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)/Likert ≥3 and for which targeted biopsies did not exclude the patient for AS.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was treatment free survival (FS). The secondary outcomes were histological GG progression FS and continuation of AS (discontinuation FS).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The study cohort included 2119 patients (1035 men with nonsuspicious MRI and 1084 with suspicious MRI) with a median follow-up of 23 (12-43) mo. For the whole cohort, 3-yr treatment FS was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 69-74). For nonsuspicious MRI and suspicious MRI groups, 3-yr treatment FS rates were, respectively, 80% (95% CI: 77-83) and 63% (95% CI: 59-66). Active treatment (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.0, p < 0.001), grade progression (HR = 1.9, p < 0.001), and discontinuation of AS (HR = 1.7, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the suspicious MRI group than in the nonsuspicious MRI group.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks of switching to treatment, histological progression, and AS discontinuation are higher in cases of suspicious MRI at inclusion.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Among men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer who choose active surveillance, those with suspicious magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the time of inclusion in active surveillance are more likely to show switch to treatment than men with nonsuspicious MRI.

Active surveillance inclusion criteria under scrutiny in magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is recommended for primary risk stratification and follow-up in Active Surveillance (AS), it is not part of common AS inclusion criteria. The objective was to compare AS eligibility by systematic biopsy (SB) and combined MRI-targeted (MRI-TB) and SB within real-world data using current AS guidelines.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter study was conducted by a German prostate cancer (PCa) working group representing six tertiary referral centers and one outpatient practice. Men with PCa and at least one MRI-visible lesion according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 were included. Twenty different AS inclusion criteria of international guidelines were applied to calculate AS eligibility using either a SB or a combined MRI-TB and SB. Reasons for AS exclusion were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1941 patients with PCa, per guideline, 583-1112 patients with PCa in both MRI-TB and SB were available for analysis. Using SB, a median of 22.1% (range 6.4-72.4%) were eligible for AS. Using the combined approach, a median of 15% (range 1.7-68.3%) were eligible for AS. Addition of MRI-TB led to a 32.1% reduction of suitable patients. Besides Gleason Score upgrading, the maximum number of positive cores were the most frequent exclusion criterion. Variability in MRI and biopsy protocols potentially limit the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a moderate number of patients with PCa can be monitored by AS to defer active treatment using current guidelines for inclusion in a real-world setting. By an additional MRI-TB, this number is markedly reduced. These results underline the need for a contemporary adjustment of AS inclusion criteria.

Does Protocol Make a Difference? Comparison of Two Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Cohorts: A Non-protocol-based Follow-up and a Protocol-based Contemporary Follow-up

Background

Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred option for initial management for low-risk prostate cancer (PC). Although many AS protocols exist, there is little evidence to support one over another.

Objective

To assess whether there is difference in overall (OS), prostate cancer–specific (CSS), metastasis-free (MFS), or treatment-free (TFS) survival between a strict (Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance [PRIAS]) and a loose (European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer [ERSPC]) AS protocol.

Design, setting, and participants

This study included two cohorts of men (n = 518) with low-risk, localized, Gleason score ≤7 PC. The ERSPC cohort included 241 men followed for 9.5 yr (median) with a non–protocol-based follow-up. The PRIAS cohort included 277 men followed for 5 yr (median) with a strict protocol.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

OS, CSS, MFS, and TFS were compared by the Kaplan-Meier method, competing risk analysis, and Cox proportional hazard regression.

Results and limitations

As expected, due to the difference in median follow-up time between the cohorts, a difference in the absolute number of events was seen. However, no difference in any of the survival outcomes was evident in the Kaplan-Meier or competing risks analysis. Furthermore, in Cox proportional hazard regression analysis, cohort (ERSPC vs PRIAS) was not associated with any of the outcomes. Results are limited by the retrospective study design, limited statistical power, and inability to match the cohorts for predictive factors.

Conclusions

There was no difference in survival outcomes between a non–protocol-based follow-up and a protocol-based contemporary AS follow-up of patients with low-risk PC. However, a longer follow-up is needed.

Patient summary

We compared survival outcomes of two cohorts of patients with low-risk prostate cancer: a strict and a loose follow-up protocol. We found no differences in survival measures between the cohorts.

Factors that influence clinicians' decisions to decrease active surveillance monitoring frequency or transition to watchful waiting for localised prostate cancer: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about clinicians' decision-making about decreasing active surveillance (AS) testing/converting patients to watchful waiting (WW), nor are there any guidelines. The objective of this study was to identify factors that clinicians consider when decreasing AS testing/converting to WW for men with prostate cancer.

DESIGN

Exploratory qualitative study.

SETTING

All participants practiced in various institutions in the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible clinicians had to provide clinical care for patients with prostate cancer in the USA and speak English. Clinicians could be either urologists or radiation oncologists. Of the 24 clinicians, 83% were urologists representing 11 states, 92% were men and 62% were white.

METHODS

This qualitative study used data from semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to ensure geographical variation in the USA. Data collection continued until thematic saturation was achieved. Framework analysis guided coding and identification of themes. Two researchers coded all transcripts independently, met to discuss and reached consensus.

RESULTS

Interviews with clinicians demonstrated that testing or monitoring for AS or transitioning to WW is happening in practice, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Decisions to decrease AS were personalised and tailored to patients' health status. Life expectancy was the dominant factor that influenced decision, but clinicians were generally hesitant to specify an age when they would decrease AS or transition to WW. Fear that poor adherence could lead to missed progression and concerns about the medico-legal issue of not doing enough were cited as barriers to decreasing AS.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that in certain situations, AS frequency is reduced or transitioned to WW, yet decisions appear to be inconsistent and there are no significant barriers. These findings could inform further areas to explore when drafting recommendations that consider patients' values and preferences when making decisions about decreasing AS/converting to WW.

MRI-derived radiomics model for baseline prediction of prostate cancer progression on active surveillance

Nearly half of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) harbour low- or intermediate-risk disease considered suitable for active surveillance (AS). However, up to 44% of patients discontinue AS within the first five years, highlighting the unmet clinical need for robust baseline risk-stratification tools that enable timely and accurate prediction of tumour progression. In this proof-of-concept study, we sought to investigate the added value of MRI-derived radiomic features to standard-of-care clinical parameters for improving baseline prediction of PCa progression in AS patients. Tumour T₂-weighted imaging (T2WI) and apparent diffusion coefficient radiomic features were extracted, with rigorous calibration and pre-processing methods applied to select the most robust features for predictive modelling. Following leave-one-out cross-validation, the addition of T2WI-derived radiomic features to clinical variables alone improved the area under the ROC curve for predicting progression from 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.481-0.743) to 0.75 (95% CI 0.64-0.86). These exploratory findings demonstrate the potential benefit of MRI-derived radiomics to add incremental benefit to clinical data only models in the baseline prediction of PCa progression on AS, paving the way for future multicentre studies validating the proposed model and evaluating its impact on clinical outcomes.

Role of PCA3 and SelectMDx in the optimization of active surveillance in prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVES

A not negligible percentage of patients included in active surveillance (AS) for low and very low risk prostate cancer (PCa) are reclassified in the confirmatory biopsy or have disease progression during follow-up. Our aim is to evaluate the role of PCA3 and SelectMDx, in an individual and combined way, in the prediction of pathological progression (PP) in a standard AS program.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Prospective and observational study comprised of 86 patients enrolled in an AS program from 2009 to 2019, with results for PCA3 and SelectMDx previous to PCa diagnosis or during their confirmatory period. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to correlate PCA3 and SelectMDx scores as well as clinical and pathological variables with PP-free survival (PPFS). The most reliable cut-offs for both biomarkers in the context of AS were defined.

RESULTS

SelectMDx showed statistically significant differences related to PPFS (HR 1.035, 95%CI: 1.012-1.057) (p = 0.002) with a C-index of 0.670 (95%CI: 0.529-0.810) and AUC of 0.714 (95%CI: 0.603-0.825) at 5 years. In our series, the most reliable cut-off point for SelectMDx was 5, with a sensitivity and specificity for PP of 69.8% and 67.4%, respectively. Same figure for PCA3 was 65, with a sensitivity and specificity for PP of 51.16% and 74.42%, respectively. The combination of both biomarkers did not improve the prediction of PP, C-index 0.630 (95%CI: 0.455-0.805).

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of low or very low risk PCa, SelectMDx > 5 predicted 5 years PP free survival with a moderate discrimination ability outperforming PCA3. The combination of both tests did not improved outcomes.

Using the Movember Foundation's GAP3 cohort to measure the effect of active surveillance on patient-reported urinary and sexual function-a retrospective study in low-risk prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is intended to overcome potential side-effects of definitive treatment. Frequent prostate biopsies during AS may, however, impact erectile (EF) and urinary function (UF). The objective of this study was to test the influence of prostate biopsies on patient-reported EF and UF using multicenter data from the largest to-date AS-database.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, data analyses were performed using the Movember GAP3 database (v3.2), containing data from 21,169 AS participants from 27 AS-cohorts worldwide. Participants were included in the study if they had at least one follow-up prostate biopsy and completed at least one patient reported outcome measure (PROM) related to EF [Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM)/five item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5)] or UF [International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS)] during follow-up. The longitudinal effect of the number of biopsies on either SHIM/IIEF-5 or IPSS were analyzed using linear mixed models to adjust for clustering at patient-level. Analyses were stratified by center; covariates included age and Gleason Grade group at diagnosis, and time on AS.

RESULTS

A total of 696 participants completed the SHIM/IIEF-5 3,175 times, with a median follow-up of 36 months [interquartile range (IQR) 20-55 months]. A total of 845 participants completed the IPSS 4,061 times, with a median follow-up of 35 months (IQR 19-56 months). The intraclass correlation (ICC) was 0.74 for the SHIM/IIEF-5 and 0.68 for the IPSS, indicating substantial differences between participants' PROMs. Limited heterogeneity between cohorts in the estimated effect of the number of biopsies on either PROM were observed. A significant association was observed between the number of biopsies and the SHIM/IIEF-5 score, but not for the IPSS score. Every biopsy was associated with a decrease in the SHIM/IIEF-5 score of an average 0.67 (95% CI, 0.47-0.88) points.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated prostate biopsy as part of an AS protocol for men with low-risk PCa does not have a significant association with self-reported UF but does impact self-reported sexual function. Further research is, however, needed to understand whether the effect on sexual function implies a negative clinical impact on their quality of life and is meaningful from a patient's perspective. In the meantime, clinicians and patients should anticipate a potential decline in erectile function and hence consider incorporating the risk of this harm into their discussion about opting for AS and also when deciding on the stringency of follow-up biopsy schedules with long-term AS.

Prediction of Grade Reclassification of Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance through the Combination of a Three-miRNA Signature and Selected Clinical Variables

Simple Summary

Active surveillance (AS) has evolved as an alternative to radical treatment for potentially indolent prostate cancer. However, current selection criteria for entering AS are suboptimal, and a significant percentage of patients discontinue AS because of disease reclassification. Hence, there is an unmet need for novel biomarkers for the accurate identification of high-risk PCa and the unequivocal classification of indolent disease. Circulating biomarkers, including microRNAs identified through liquid biopsies, represent a valuable approach to improve on currently available clinicopathological risk-stratification tools. In an attempt to identify specific microRNA signatures as potential circulating biomarkers, the authors performed an unprecedented analysis of the global microRNA profile in plasma samples from AS patients and identified and validated a three-microRNA signature able to predict patient reclassification. The addition of the three-microRNA signature was able to improve the performance of currently available clinicopathological variables, thus showing potential for the refinement of AS patients’ selection.

Abstract

Active surveillance (AS) has evolved as a strategy alternative to radical treatments for very low risk and low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). However, current criteria for selecting AS patients are still suboptimal. Here, we performed an unprecedented analysis of the circulating miRNome to investigate whether specific miRNAs associated with disease reclassification can provide risk refinement to standard clinicopathological features for improving patient selection. The global miRNA expression profiles were assessed in plasma samples prospectively collected at baseline from 386 patients on AS included in three independent mono-institutional cohorts (training, testing and validation sets). A three-miRNA signature (miR-511-5p, miR-598-3p and miR-199a-5p) was found to predict reclassification in all patient cohorts (training set: AUC 0.74, 95% CI 0.60–0.87, testing set: AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.51–0.80, validation set: AUC 0.68, 95% CI 0.56–0.80). Importantly, the addition of the three-miRNA signature improved the performance of the clinical model including clinicopathological variables only (AUC 0.70, 95% CI 0.61–0.78 vs. 0.76, 95% CI 0.68–0.84). Overall, we trained, tested and validated a three-miRNA signature which, combined with selected clinicopathological variables, may represent a promising biomarker to improve on currently available clinicopathological risk stratification tools for a better selection of truly indolent PCa patients suitable for AS.

Racial differences in the treatment and outcomes for prostate cancer in Massachusetts

BACKGROUND

Massachusetts is a northeastern state with universally mandated health insurance since 2006. Although Black men have generally worse prostate cancer outcomes, emerging data suggest that they may experience equivalent outcomes within a fully insured system. In this setting, the authors analyzed treatments and outcomes of non-Hispanic White and Black men in Massachusetts.

METHODS

White and Black men who were 20 years old or older and had been diagnosed with localized intermediate- or high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer in 2004-2015 were identified in the Massachusetts Cancer Registry. Adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess predictors of definitive therapy. Adjusted and unadjusted survival models compared cancer-specific mortality. Interaction terms were then used to assess whether the effect of race varied between counties.

RESULTS

A total of 20,856 men were identified. Of these, 19,287 (92.5%) were White. There were significant county-level differences in the odds of receiving definitive therapy and survival. Survival was worse for those with high-risk cancer (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.4-1.60) and those with public insurance (adjusted HR for Medicaid, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.38-2.07; adjusted HR for Medicare, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.14-1.35). Black men were less likely to receive definitive therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.74-0.83) but had a 17% lower cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.7-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite lower odds of definitive treatment, Black men experience decreased cancer-specific mortality in comparison with White men in Massachusetts. These data support the growing body of research showing that Black men may achieve outcomes equivalent to or even better than those of White men within the context of a well-insured population.

LAY SUMMARY

There is a growing body of evidence showing that the excess risk of death among Black men with prostate cancer may be caused by disparities in access to care, with few or no disparities seen in universally insured health systems such as the Veterans Affairs and US Military Health System. Therefore, the authors sought to assess racial disparities in prostate cancer in Massachusetts, which was the earliest US state to mandate universal insurance coverage (in 2006). Despite lower odds of definitive treatment, Black men with prostate cancer experience reduced cancer-specific mortality in comparison with White men in Massachusetts. These data support the growing body of research showing that Black men may achieve outcomes equivalent to or even better than those of White men within the context of a well-insured population.

MicroRNAs as Epigenetic Determinants of Treatment Response and Potential Therapeutic Targets in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common tumor in men worldwide, and the fifth leading cause of male cancer-related deaths in western countries. PC is a very heterogeneous disease, meaning that optimal clinical management of individual patients is challenging. Depending on disease grade and stage, patients can be followed in active surveillance protocols or undergo surgery, radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, and chemotherapy. Although therapeutic advancements exist in both radiatiotherapy and chemotherapy, in a considerable proportion of patients, the treatment remains unsuccessful, mainly due to tumor poor responsiveness and/or recurrence and metastasis. microRNAs (miRNAs), small noncoding RNAs that epigenetically regulate gene expression, are essential actors in multiple tumor-related processes, including apoptosis, cell growth and proliferation, autophagy, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, invasion, and metastasis. Given that these processes are deeply involved in cell response to anti-cancer treatments, miRNAs have been considered as key determinants of tumor treatment response. In this review, we provide an overview on main PCa-related miRNAs and describe the biological mechanisms by which specific miRNAs concur to determine PCa response to radiation and drug therapy. Additionally, we illustrate whether miRNAs can be considered novel therapeutic targets or tools on the basis of the consequences of their expression modulation in PCa experimental models.

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.

Role of PCA3 and SelectMDx in the optimization of active surveillance in prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

A not negligible percentage of patients included in active surveillance (AS) for low and very low risk prostate cancer (PCa) are reclassified in the confirmatory biopsy or have disease progression during follow-up. Our aim is to evaluate the role of PCA3 and SelectMDx, in an individual and combined way, in the prediction of pathological progression (PP) in a standard AS program.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective and observational study comprised of 86 patients enrolled in an AS program from 2009 to 2019, with results for PCA3 and SelectMDx previous to PCa diagnosis or during their confirmatory period. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to correlate PCA3 and SelectMDx scores as well as clinical and pathological variables with PP-free survival (PPFS). The most reliable cut-offs for both biomarkers in the context of AS were defined.

RESULTS

SelectMDx showed statistically significant differences related to PPFS (HR: 1.035; 95%CI: 1.012-1.057) (P=.002) with a C-index of 0.670 (95%CI: 0.529-0.810) and AUC of 0.714 (95%CI: 0.603-0.825) at 5years. In our series, the most reliable cut-off point for SelectMDx was 5, with a sensitivity and specificity for PP of 69.8% and 67.4%, respectively. Same figure for PCA3 was 65, with a sensitivity and specificity for PP of 51.16% and 74.42%, respectively. The combination of both biomarkers did not improve the prediction of PP, C-index 0.630 (95%CI: 0.455-0.805).

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of low or very low risk PCa, SelectMDx >5 predicted 5years PP free survival with a moderate discrimination ability outperforming PCA3. The combination of both tests did not improved outcomes.

A first step towards a global nomogram to predict disease progression for men on active surveillance

BACKGROUND

Signs of disease progression (28%) and conversion to active treatment without evidence of disease progression (13%) are the main reasons for discontinuation of active surveillance (AS) in men with localised prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to develop a nomogram to predict disease progression in these patients.

METHODS

As a first step in the development of a nomogram, using data from Movembers' GAP3 Consortium (n=14,380), we assessed heterogeneity between centres in terms of risk of disease progression. We started with assessment of baseline hazards for disease progression based on grouping of centres according to follow-up protocols [high: yearly; intermediate: ~2 yearly; and low: at year 1, 4 & 7 (i.e., PRIAS)]. We conducted cause-specific random effect Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate risk of disease progression by centre in each group.

RESULTS

Disease progression rates varied substantially between centres [median hazard ratio (MHR): 2.5]. After adjustment for various clinical factors (age, year of diagnosis, Gleason grade group, number of positive cores and PSA), substantial heterogeneity in disease progression remained between centres.

CONCLUSIONS

When combining worldwide data on AS, we noted unexplained differences of disease progression rate even after adjustment for various clinical factors. This suggests that when developing a global nomogram, local adjustments for differences in risk of disease progression and competing outcomes such as conversion to active treatment need to be considered.

Development and Validation of a Clinical Prognostic Stage Group System for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Using Disease-Specific Mortality Results From the International Staging Collaboration for Cancer of the Prostate

Importance

In 2016, the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) established criteria to evaluate prediction models for staging. No localized prostate cancer models were endorsed by the Precision Medicine Core committee, and 8th edition staging was based on expert consensus.

Objective

To develop and validate a pretreatment clinical prognostic stage group system for nonmetastatic prostate cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multinational cohort study included 7 centers from the United States, Canada, and Europe, the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Veterans Affairs Medical Centers collaborative (5 centers), and the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry (43 centers) (the STAR-CAP cohort). Patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 prostate adenocarcinoma treated from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2013 (follow-up completed December 31, 2017). The STAR-CAP cohort was randomly divided into training and validation data sets; statisticians were blinded to the validation data until the model was locked. A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cohort was used as a second validation set. Analysis was performed from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019.

Exposures

Curative intent radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Based on a competing-risk regression model, a points-based Score staging system was developed. Model discrimination (C index), calibration, and overall performance were assessed in the validation cohorts.

Results

Of 19 684 patients included in the analysis (median age, 64.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 59.0-70.0] years), 12 421 were treated with RP and 7263 with radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 71.8 (IQR, 34.3-124.3) months; 4078 (20.7%) were followed up for at least 10 years. Age, T category, N category, Gleason grade, pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level, and the percentage of positive core biopsy results among biopsies performed were included as variables. In the validation set, predicted 10-year PCSM for the 9 Score groups ranged from 0.3% to 40.0%. The 10-year C index (0.796; 95% CI, 0.760-0.828) exceeded that of the AJCC 8th edition (0.757; 95% CI, 0.719-0.792), which was improved across age, race, and treatment modality and within the SEER validation cohort. The Score system performed similarly to individualized random survival forest and interaction models and outperformed National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) risk grouping 3- and 4-tier classification systems (10-year C index for NCCN 3-tier, 0.729; for NCCN 4-tier, 0.746; for Score, 0.794) as well as CAPRA (10-year C index for CAPRA, 0.760; for Score, 0.782).

Conclusions and Relevance

Using a large, diverse international cohort treated with standard curative treatment options, a proposed AJCC-compliant clinical prognostic stage group system for prostate cancer has been developed. This system may allow consistency of reporting and interpretation of results and clinical trial design.

Update on Multiparametric Prostate MRI During Active Surveillance: Current and Future Trends and Role of the PRECISE Recommendations

Active surveillance for low-to-intermediate risk prostate cancer is a conservative management approach that aims to avoid or delay active treatment until there is evidence of disease progression. In recent years, multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has been increasingly used in active surveillance and has shown great promise in patient selection and monitoring. This has been corroborated by publication of the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation (PRECISE) recommendations, which define the ideal reporting standards for mpMRI during active surveillance. The PRECISE recommendations include a system that assigns a score from 1 to 5 (the PRECISE score) for the assessment of radiologic change on serial mpMRI scans. PRECISE scores are defined as follows: a score of 3 indicates radiologic stability, a score of 1 or 2 denotes radiologic regression, and a score of 4 or 5 indicates radiologic progression. In the present study, we discuss current and future trends in the use of mpMRI during active surveillance and illustrate the natural history of prostate cancer on serial scans according to the PRECISE recommendations. We highlight how the ability to classify radiologic change on mpMRI with use of the PRECISE recommendations helps clinical decision making.

Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Serial Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly utilized to improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Evidence for serial MRI in men on active surveillance (AS) is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of MRI in detecting Gleason grade group (GG) ≥2 disease in confirmatory and subsequent surveillance biopsies for men on AS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a single-center study of men with low-risk prostate cancer enrolled in an AS cohort between 2006 and 2018. All men were diagnosed by systematic biopsy and underwent MRI prior to confirmatory ("MRI1") and subsequent surveillance ("MRI2") biopsies. MRI lesions were scored with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was biopsy upgrade to GG ≥ 2 prostate cancer, and the secondary outcome was definitive treatment. Test characteristics for PI-RADS score were calculated. Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to determine the associations between PI-RADS score change and outcomes, on a per-examination basis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 125 men with a median follow-up of 78 mo, 38% experienced an increase in PI-RADS scores. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of PI-RADS ≥3 for GG ≥ 2 disease improved from MRI1 to MRI2 (from 85% to 91% and from 26% to 49%, respectively). An increase in PI-RADS scores from MRI1 to MRI2 was associated with GG ≥ 2 (odds ratio [OR] 4.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-13.2) compared with PI-RADS 1-3 on both MRI scans. Men with PI-RADS 4-5 lesions on both MRI scans had a higher likelihood of GG ≥ 2 than patients with PI-RADS 1-3 lesions on both (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.3-8.6). Importantly, any increase in PI-RADS scores was independently associated with definitive treatment (hazard ratio 3.9, 95% CI 1.3-11.9). This study was limited by its retrospective, single-center design.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognostic value of MRI improves with serial examination and provides additional risk stratification. Validation in other cohorts is needed.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at the role of serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance at the University of California, San Francisco. We found that both consistently visible and increasingly suspicious lesions were associated with biopsy upgrade and definitive treatment.

Complementing the active surveillance criteria with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

PURPOSE

To evaluate the usefulness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to avoid misclassification of patients with clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) into active surveillance (AS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with Gleason grade group (GG) 1 PCa on systematic biopsy who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy (RP) were included. mpMRI and pathologic results were compared between the AS and NOT-AS candidates. Unfavorable disease was defined as the identification of T3-4 disease or GG upgrade in the RP specimen. We established an ideal cutoff Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score for predicting unfavorable disease, and analyzed the location of index lesions on mpMRI.

RESULTS

PI-RADS scores were not significantly different between AS candidates (n=64) and NOT-AS candidates (n=136; p=0.629). Among 64 AS candidates, GG upgrading and unfavorable disease were diagnosed after RP in 24 (37.5%) and 25 (39.1%) patients, respectively. The rate of unfavorable disease was greater for patients with a PI-RADS score of 5 (83.3%) than in those with a score ≤4 (34.5%; p=0.030). Moreover, most PI-RADS 5 lesions in AS candidates were located in the anterior half of the prostate, with GG upgrading on targeted biopsy in 75.0% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the patients with GG 1 PCa, PI-RADS scores did not differ significantly between AS and NOT-AS candidates. Nonetheless, AS candidates with PI-RADS 5 lesions were diagnosed with unfavorable disease in >80% of RP specimens. Significant cancer located in the anterior half of the prostate including the transitional zone can be missed by systematic biopsy.

Natural history of prostate cancer on active surveillance: stratification by MRI using the PRECISE recommendations in a UK cohort

Objectives

The PRECISE recommendations for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) include repeated measurement of each lesion, and attribution of a PRECISE radiological progression score for the likelihood of clinically significant change over time. We aimed to compare the PRECISE score with clinical progression in patients who are managed using an MRI-led AS protocol.

Methods

A total of 553 patients on AS for low- and intermediate-risk PCa (up to Gleason score 3 + 4) who had two or more MRI scans performed between December 2005 and January 2020 were included. Overall, 2161 scans were retrospectively re-reported by a dedicated radiologist to give a PI-RADS v2 score for each scan and assess the PRECISE score for each follow-up scan. Clinical progression was defined by histological progression to ≥ Gleason score 4 + 3 (Gleason Grade Group 3) and/or initiation of active treatment. Progression-free survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test was used to assess differences between curves.

Results

Overall, 165/553 (30%) patients experienced the primary outcome of clinical progression (median follow-up, 74.5 months; interquartile ranges, 53–98). Of all patients, 313/553 (57%) did not show radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 1–3), of which 296/313 (95%) had also no clinical progression. Of the remaining 240/553 patients (43%) with radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 4–5), 146/240 (61%) experienced clinical progression (p < 0.0001). Patients with radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 4-5) showed a trend to an increase in PSA density.

Conclusions

Patients without radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 1-3) during AS had a very low likelihood of clinical progression and many could avoid routine re-biopsy.

Key Points

• Patients without radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 1–3) during AS had a very low likelihood of clinical progression and many could avoid routine re-biopsy.

• Clinical progression was almost always detectable in patients with radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 4–5) during AS.

• Patients with radiological progression on MRI (PRECISE 4–5) during AS showed a trend to an increase in PSA density.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-020-07256-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Computer Extracted Features from Initial H&E Tissue Biopsies Predict Disease Progression for Prostate Cancer Patients on Active Surveillance

In this work, we assessed the ability of computerized features of nuclear morphology from diagnostic biopsy images to predict prostate cancer (CaP) progression in active surveillance (AS) patients. Improved risk characterization of AS patients could reduce over-testing of low-risk patients while directing high-risk patients to therapy. A total of 191 (125 progressors, 66 non-progressors) AS patients from a single site were identified using The Johns Hopkins University's (JHU) AS-eligibility criteria. Progression was determined by pathologists at JHU. 30 progressors and 30 non-progressors were randomly selected to create the training cohort D₁ (n = 60). The remaining patients comprised the validation cohort D₂ (n = 131). Digitized Hematoxylin & Eosin (H&E) biopsies were annotated by a pathologist for CaP regions. Nuclei within the cancer regions were segmented using a watershed method and 216 nuclear features describing position, shape, orientation, and clustering were extracted. Six features associated with disease progression were identified using D₁ and then used to train a machine learning classifier. The classifier was validated on D₂. The classifier was further compared on a subset of D₂ (n = 47) against pro-PSA, an isoform of prostate specific antigen (PSA) more linked with CaP, in predicting progression. Performance was evaluated with area under the curve (AUC). A combination of nuclear spatial arrangement, shape, and disorder features were associated with progression. The classifier using these features yielded an AUC of 0.75 in D₂. On the 47 patient subset with pro-PSA measurements, the classifier yielded an AUC of 0.79 compared to an AUC of 0.42 for pro-PSA. Nuclear morphometric features from digitized H&E biopsies predicted progression in AS patients. This may be useful for identifying AS-eligible patients who could benefit from immediate curative therapy. However, additional multi-site validation is needed.

Concordance of confirmatory prostate biopsy in active surveillance with national guidelines: An analysis from the multi-institutional PURC cohort

PURPOSE

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend confirmatory biopsy within 12 months of active surveillance (AS) enrollment. With <10 cores on initial biopsy, re-biopsy should occur within 6 months. Our objective was to determine if patients on AS within practices in the Pennsylvania Urologic Regional Collaborative (PURC) receive guideline concordant confirmatory biopsies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Within PURC, a prospective collaborative of diverse urology practices in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, we identified men enrolled in AS after first biopsy, analyzing time to re-biopsy and factors associated with various intervals of re-biopsy.

RESULTS

In total, 1,047 patients were enrolled in AS for a minimum of 12 months after initial biopsy. Four hundred seventy-seven (45%) underwent second biopsy at 1 of the 9 PURC practices. The number of patients undergoing re-biopsy within 6 months, 6 to 12 months, 12 to 18 months, and >18 months was 71 (14%), 218 (45.7%), 134 (28%), and 54 (11%), respectively. Sixty percent underwent confirmatory biopsy within 12 months. On multivariate analysis, re-biopsy interval was associated with number of positive cores, perineural invasion, and practice ID (all P < 0.05). Adjusted multivariable regression did not identify factors predictive of re-biopsy interval.

CONCLUSION

Of patients who underwent confirmatory biopsy at PURC practices, 60.5% were within 12 months per NCCN guidelines. This suggests area for improvement in guideline adherence after enrollment in AS. All practices that offer AS should periodically perform similar analyses to monitor their performance. In an era of value-based care, adherence to guideline based active surveillance practices may eventually comprise national quality metrics affecting provider reimbursement.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Alone is Insufficient to Detect Grade Reclassification in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has improved the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. It remains unclear, however, whether mpMRI can safely replace confirmatory or surveillance biopsies in men with low-risk disease managed with active surveillance (AS). Overall, 166 men were upgraded at a median of 29 mo (interquartile range 13-54). The overall negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI was 79.5% and ranged from 74.4% to 84.6% for all AS biopsies up to the fourth surveillance biopsy. In men with prostate-specific antigen density ≥0.15 ng/ml/cm³, the overall NPV of mpMRI was 65.5% and ranged from 57.1% to 73.3% across serial mpMRI scans. These findings support the hypothesis that mpMRI is helpful but insufficient to rule out pathological reclassification, especially at confirmatory biopsy or in the presence of other risk factors. PATIENT SUMMARY: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) alone misses a considerable percentage of clinically significant prostate cancers (Gleason grade group ≥2) in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. We conclude that mpMRI alone cannot safely replace surveillance prostate biopsies, particularly at confirmatory biopsy or in the presence of other risk factors.

Comparing Perspectives of Canadian Men Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer and Health Care Professionals About Active Surveillance

Active surveillance (AS) has gained acceptance as a primary management approach for patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC). In this qualitative study, we compared perspectives between patients and health care professionals (HCP) to identify what may contribute to patient-provider discordance, influence patient decision-making, and interfere with the uptake of AS. We performed a systematic comparison of perspectives about AS reported from focus groups with men eligible for AS (7 groups, N = 52) and HCP (5 groups, N = 48) who engaged in conversations about AS with patient. We used conventional content analysis to scrutinize separately focus group transcripts and reached a consensus on similar or divergent viewpoints between them. Patients and clinicians agreed that AS was appropriate for low grade PC and understood the low-risk nature of the disease. They shared the perspective that disease status was a critical factor to pursue or discontinue AS. However, men expressed a greater emphasis on quality of life in their decisions related to AS. Patients and clinicians differed in their perspectives on the clarity, availability, and volume of information needed and offered; clinicians acknowledged variations between HCP when presenting AS, while patients were often compelled to seek additional information beyond what was provided by physicians and experienced difficulty in finding or interpreting information applicable to their situation. A greater understanding of discordant perspectives about AS between patients and HCP can help improve patient engagement and education, inform development of knowledge-based tools or aids for decision-making, and identify areas that require standardization across the clinical practice.

Radical prostatectomy versus deferred treatment for localised prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is a common cancer but is oftentimes slow growing. When confined to the prostate, radical prostatectomy (RP), which involves removal of the prostate, offers potential cure that may come at the price of adverse events. Deferred treatment, involving observation and palliative treatment only (watchful waiting (WW)) or close monitoring and delayed local treatment with curative intent as needed in the setting of disease progression (active monitoring (AM)/surveillance (AS)) might be an alternative. This is an update of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of RP compared with deferred treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (including CDSR, CENTRAL, DARE, and HTA), MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, Web of Science, LILACS, Scopus, and OpenGrey. Additionally, we searched two trial registries and conference abstracts of three conferences (EAU, AUA, and ASCO) until 3 March 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared RP versus deferred treatment in patients with localised prostate cancer, defined as T1-2, N0, M0 prostate cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of references and extracted data from included studies. The primary outcome was time to death from any cause; secondary outcomes were: time to death from prostate cancer; time to disease progression; time to metastatic disease; quality of life, including urinary and sexual function; and adverse events. We assessed the certainty of evidence per outcome using the GRADE approach.  MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies with 2635 participants (average age between 60 to 70 years). Three multicentre RCTs, from Europe and USA, compared RP with WW (n = 1537), and one compared RP with AM (n = 1098). Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting RP probably reduces the risk of death from any cause (hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.90; 3 studies with 1537 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on overall mortality at 29 years, this corresponds to 764 deaths per 1000 men in the RP group compared to 839 deaths per 1000 men in the WW group. RP probably also lowers the risk of death from prostate cancer (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.44-0.73; 2 studies with 1426 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on prostate cancer-specific mortality at 29 years, this corresponds to 195 deaths from prostate cancer per 1000 men in the RP group compared with 316 deaths from prostate cancer per 1000 men in the WW group. RP may reduce the risk of progression (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35-0.54; 2 studies with 1426 participants; I² = 54%; low-certainty evidence); at 19.5 years, this corresponds to 391 progressions per 1000 men for the RP group compared with 684 progressions per 1000 men for the WW group) and probably reduces the risk of developing metastatic disease (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.46-0.70; 2 studies with 1426 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence); at 29 years, this corresponds to 271 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for RP compared with 431 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for WW. General quality of life at 12 years' follow-up is probably similar for both groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.0, 95% CI 0.85-1.16; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to 344  patients with high quality of life per 1000 men for the RP group compared with 344 patients with high quality of life per 1000 men for the WW group. Rates of urinary incontinence may be considerably higher (RR 3.97, 95% CI 2.34-6.74; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to 173 incontinent men per 1000 in the RP group compared with 44 incontinent men per 1000 in the WW group, as are rates of erectile dysfunction (RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.63-4.38; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to 389 erectile dysfunction events per 1000 for the RP group compared with 146 erectile dysfunction events per 1000 for the WW group, both at 10 years' follow-up. Radical prostatectomy versus active monitoring Based on one study including 1098 participants with 10 years' follow-up, there are probably no differences between RP and AM in time to death from any cause (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65-1.33; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on overall mortality at 10 years, this corresponds to 101 deaths per 1000 men in the RP group compared with 108 deaths per 1000 men in the AM group. Similarly, risk of death from prostate cancer probably is not different between the two groups (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.21-1.89; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on prostate cancer-specific mortality at 10 years, this corresponds to nine prostate cancer deaths per 1000 men in the RP group compared with 15 prostate cancer deaths per 1000 men in the AM group. RP probably reduces the risk of progression (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.27-0.56; moderate-certainty evidence; at 10 years, this corresponds to 86 progressions per 1000 men for RP compared with 206 progressions per 1000 men for AM) and the risk of developing metastatic disease (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21-0.73; moderate-certainty evidence; at 10 years, this corresponds to 24 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for the RP group compared with 61 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for the AM group).The general quality of life during follow-up was not different between the treatment groups. However, urinary function (mean difference (MD) 8.60 points lower, 95% CI 11.2-6.0 lower) and sexual function (MD 14.9 points lower, 95% CI 18.5-11.3 lower) on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26) instrument, were worse in the RP group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on long-term follow-up, RP compared with WW probably results in substantially improved oncological outcomes in men with localised prostate cancer but also markedly increases rates of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. These findings are largely based on men diagnosed before widespread PSA screening, thereby limiting generalisability. Compared to AM, based on follow-up to 10 years, RP probably has similar outcomes with regard to overall and disease-specific survival yet probably reduces the risks of disease progression and metastatic disease. Urinary function and sexual function are probably decreased for the patients treated with RP.

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical variables: Which is the best combination to predict reclassification in active surveillance patients?

Introduction & objectives

We tested the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in disease reclassification and whether the combination of mpMRI and clinicopathological variables could represent the most accurate approach to predict the risk of reclassification during active surveillance.

Materials & methods

Three-hundred eighty-nine patients (pts) underwent mpMRI and subsequent confirmatory or follow-up biopsy according to the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) protocol. Pts with negative (−) mpMRI underwent systematic random biopsy. Pts with positive (+) mpMRI [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADS-V2) score ≥3] underwent targeted + systematic random biopsies. Multivariate analyses were used to create three models predicting the probability of reclassification [International Society of Urological Pathology ≥ Grade Group 2 (GG2)]: a basic model including only clinical variables (age, prostate-specific antigen density, and number of positive cores at baseline), an Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) model including only the PI-RADS score, and a full model including both the previous ones. The predictive accuracy (PA) of each model was quantified using the area under the curve.

Results

mpMRI negative (−) was recorded in 127 (32.6%) pts; mpMRI positive (+) was recorded in 262 pts: 72 (18.5%) had PI-RADS 3, 150 (38.6%) PI-RADS 4, and 40 (10.3%) PI-RADS 5 lesions. At a median follow-up of 12 months, 125 pts (32%) were reclassified to GG2 prostate cancer. The rate of reclassification to GG2 prostate cancer was 17%, 35%, 38%, and 52% for mpMRI (−), PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, respectively (P < 0.001). The PA was 69% and 64% in the basic and MRI models, respectively. The full model had the best PA of 74%: older age (P = 0.023; Odds ratio (OR) = 1.040), prostate-specific antigen density (P = 0.037; OR = 1.324), number of positive cores at baseline (P = 0.001; OR = 1.441), and PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 (overall P = 0.001; OR = 2.458, 3.007, and 3.898, respectively) were independent predictors of reclassification.

Conclusions

Disease reclassification increased according to the PI-RADS score increase, at confirmatory or follow-up biopsy. However, a no-negligible rate of reclassification was found also in cases of mpMRI (−). The combination of mpMRI and clinicopathological variables still represents the most accurate approach to pts on active surveillance.