The influence of BRCA2 mutation on localized prostate cancer

Ductal, intraductal, and cribriform carcinoma of the prostate: Molecular characteristics and clinical management

Prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma accounts for approximately 95% of prostate cancer (CaP) cases. The remaining 5% of histologic subtypes of CaP are known to be more aggressive and have recently garnered substantial attention. These histologic subtypes - namely, prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA), intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), and cribriform carcinoma of the prostate (CC-P) - typically exhibit distinct growth characteristics, genomic features, and unique oncologic outcomes. For example, PTEN mutations, which cause uncontrolled cell growth, are frequently present in IDC-P and CC-P. Germline mutations in homologous DNA recombination repair (HRR) genes (e.g., BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, PALB2, and CHEK2) are discovered in 40% of patients with IDC-P, while only 9% of patients without ductal involvement had a germline mutation. CC-P is associated with deletions in common tumor suppressor genes, including PTEN, TP53, NKX3-1, MAP3K7, RB1, and CHD1. Evidence suggests abiraterone may be superior to docetaxel as a first-line treatment for patients with IDC-P. To address these and other critical pathological attributes, this review examines the molecular pathology, genetics, treatments, and oncologic outcomes associated with CC-P, PDA, and IDC-P with the objective of creating a comprehensive resource with a centralized repository of information on PDA, IDC-P, and CC-P.

Unveiling the Genomic Landscape of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate Using Spatial Gene Expression Analysis

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP) has recently attracted increasing interest owing to its unfavorable prognoses. To effectively identify the IDCP-specific gene expression profile, we took a novel approach of characterizing a typical IDCP case using spatial gene expression analysis. A formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sample was subjected to Visium CytAssist Spatial Gene Expression analysis. IDCP within invasive prostate cancer sites was recognized as a distinct cluster separate from other invasive cancer clusters. Highly expressed genes defining the IDCP cluster, such as MUC6, MYO16, NPY, and KLK12, reflected the aggressive nature of high-grade prostate cancer. IDCP sites also showed increased hypoxia markers HIF1A, BNIP3L, PDK1, and POGLUT1; decreased fibroblast markers COL1A2, DCN, and LUM; and decreased immune cell markers CCR5 and FCGR3A. Overall, these findings indicate that the hypoxic tumor microenvironment and reduced recruitment of fibroblasts and immune cells, which reflect morphological features of IDCP, may influence the aggressiveness of high-grade prostate cancer.

Genomics and Artificial Intelligence: Prostate Cancer

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing prostate cancer genomics research. By leveraging machine learning and deep learning algorithms, researchers can rapidly analyze vast genomic datasets to identify patterns and correlations that may be missed by traditional methods. These AI-driven insights can lead to the discovery of novel biomarkers, enhance the accuracy of diagnosis, and predict disease progression and treatment response. As such, AI is becoming an indispensable tool in the pursuit of personalized medicine for prostate cancer.

Genomic and Evolutionary Characterization of Concurrent Intraductal Carcinoma and Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is a lethal prostate cancer subtype that generally coexists with invasive high-grade prostate acinar adenocarcinoma (PAC) but exhibits distinct biological features compared with concomitant adenocarcinoma. In this study, we performed whole-exome, RNA, and DNA-methylation sequencing of IDC-P, concurrent invasive high-grade PAC lesions, and adjacent normal prostate tissues isolated from 22 radical prostatectomy specimens. Three evolutionary patterns of concurrent IDC-P and PAC were identified: early divergent, late divergent, and clonally distant. In contrast to those with a late divergent evolutionary pattern, tumors with clonally distant and early divergent evolutionary patterns showed higher genomic, epigenomic, transcriptional, and pathologic heterogeneity between IDC-P and PAC. Compared with coexisting PAC, IDC-P displayed increased expression of adverse prognosis-associated genes. Survival analysis based on an independent cohort of 505 patients with metastatic prostate cancer revealed that IDC-P carriers with lower risk International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 1-4 adenocarcinoma displayed a castration-resistant free survival as poor as those with the highest risk ISUP grade 5 tumors that lacked concurrent IDC-P. Furthermore, IDC-P exhibited robust cell-cycle progression and androgen receptor activities, characterized by an enrichment of cellular proliferation-associated master regulators and genes involved in intratumoral androgen biosynthesis. Overall, this study provides a molecular groundwork for the aggressive behavior of IDC-P and could help identify potential strategies to improve treatment of IDC-P.

SIGNIFICANCE

The genomic, transcriptomic, and epigenomic characterization of concurrent intraductal carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the prostate deepens the biological understanding of this lethal disease and provides a genetic basis for developing targeted therapies.

New Facets of DNA Double Strand Break Repair: Radiation Dose as Key Determinant of HR versus c-NHEJ Engagement

Radiation therapy is an essential component of present-day cancer management, utilizing ionizing radiation (IR) of different modalities to mitigate cancer progression. IR functions by generating ionizations in cells that induce a plethora of DNA lesions. The most detrimental among them are the DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). In the course of evolution, cells of higher eukaryotes have evolved four major DSB repair pathways: classical non-homologous end joining (c-NHEJ), homologous recombination (HR), alternative end-joining (alt-EJ), and single strand annealing (SSA). These mechanistically distinct repair pathways have different cell cycle- and homology-dependencies but, surprisingly, they operate with widely different fidelity and kinetics and therefore contribute unequally to cell survival and genome maintenance. It is therefore reasonable to anticipate tight regulation and coordination in the engagement of these DSB repair pathway to achieve the maximum possible genomic stability. Here, we provide a state-of-the-art review of the accumulated knowledge on the molecular mechanisms underpinning these repair pathways, with emphasis on c-NHEJ and HR. We discuss factors and processes that have recently come to the fore. We outline mechanisms steering DSB repair pathway choice throughout the cell cycle, and highlight the critical role of DNA end resection in this process. Most importantly, however, we point out the strong preference for HR at low DSB loads, and thus low IR doses, for cells irradiated in the G2-phase of the cell cycle. We further explore the molecular underpinnings of transitions from high fidelity to low fidelity error-prone repair pathways and analyze the coordination and consequences of this transition on cell viability and genomic stability. Finally, we elaborate on how these advances may help in the development of improved cancer treatment protocols in radiation therapy.

Germline DNA-Repair Genes and HOXB13 Mutations in Korean Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Data from a Large Korean Cohort

PURPOSE

Germline mutations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes such as BRCA2 have been associated with prostate cancer (PC) risk but has not been thoroughly evaluated for metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) in Asian men. This study attempts to evaluate frequency of DDR mutations in the largest cohort of Koreans.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We recruited 340 patients with mPC unselected for family history of cancer and compared to 495 controls. Whole genome sequencing was applied to assess germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) in 26 DDR genes and HOXB13, including 7 genes (ATM, BRCA1/2, CHEK2, BRIP1, PALB2, and NBN) associated with hereditary PC. Comparisons to published Caucasian and Japanese cohorts were performed.

RESULTS

Total of 28 PV/LPVs were identified in 30 (8.8%) patients; mutations were found in 13 genes, including BRCA2 (15 men [4.41%]), ATM (2 men [0.59%]), NBN (2 men [0.59%], and BRIP1 (2 men [0.59%]). Only one patient had HOXB13 mutation (0.29%). A lower rate of overall germline variant frequency was observed in Korean mPC compared to Caucasians (8.8% vs. 11.8%), but individual variants notably differed from Caucasian and geographically similar Japanese cohorts. PV/LPVs in DDR genes tended to increase gradually with higher Gleason scores (GS 7, 7.1%; GS 8, 7.5%; GS 9-10, 9.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA2 was the most frequently mutated gene common to different cohorts supporting its importance, but differences in variant distribution in Korean mPC underscore the need for ethnic-specific genetic models. Future ethnic-specific analyses are warranted to verify our findings.

Senescence-associated secretory phenotype constructed detrimental and beneficial subtypes and prognostic index for prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

Cellular senescence is growing in popularity in cancer. A dual function is played by the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) that senescent cells produce in the development of pro-inflammatory niches, tissue regeneration or destruction, senescence propagation, and malignant transformation. In this study, we conducted thorough bioinformatic analysis and meta-analysis to discover detrimental and beneficial subtypes and prognostic index for prostate cancer (PCa) patients using the experimentally confirmed SASP genes.

METHODS

We identified differentially expressed and prognosis-related SASP genes and used them to construct two molecular subtypes and risk score. Another two external cohorts were used to confirm the prognostic effect of the above subtypes and risk score and meta-analysis was further conducted. Additionally, functional analysis, tumor stemness and heterogeneity and tumor microenvironment were also evaluated. We completed analyses using software R 3.6.3 and its suitable packages. Meta-analysis was performed by software Stata 14.0.

RESULTS

Through multivariate Cox regression analysis and consensus clustering analysis, we used VGF, IGFBP3 and ANG to establish detrimental and beneficial subtypes in the TCGA cohort, which was validated through other two independent cohorts. Meta-analysis showed that detrimental SASP group had significantly higher risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) than beneficial SASP group (HR: 2.48). Moreover, we also constructed and validated risk score based on these genes to better guide clinical practice. DNA repair, MYC target, oxidative phosphorylation, proteasome and ribosome were highly enriched in detrimental SASP group. Detrimental SASP group had significantly higher levels of B cells, CD8+ T cells, homologous recombination deficiency, loss of heterozygosity, microsatellite instability, purity, tumor mutation burden, mRNAsi, differentially methylated probes and epigenetically regulated RNA expression than beneficial SASP group. The top mutation genes between detrimental and beneficial SASP groups were SPOP, FOXA1, KMT2C, APC, BSN, DNAH17, MYH6, EPPK1, ZNF536 and ZC3H13 with statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

From perspective of SASP, we found detrimental and beneficial tumor subtypes which were closely associated with BCR-free survival for PCa patients, which might be important for the furture research in the field of PCa.

DNA Damage Repair Pathways in Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review of Molecular Mechanisms, Emerging Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets in Precision Oncology

Prostate cancer (PCa) has a distinct molecular signature, including characteristic chromosomal translocations, gene deletions and defective DNA damage repair mechanisms. One crucial pathway involved is homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and it is found in almost 20% of metastatic castrate-resistant PCa (mCRPC). Inherited/germline mutations are associated with a hereditary predisposition to early PCa development and aggressive behavior. BRCA2, ATM and CHECK2 are the most frequently HRD-mutated genes. BRCA2-mutated tumors have unfavorable clinical and pathological characteristics, such as intraductal carcinoma. PARP inhibitors, due to the induction of synthetic lethality, have been therapeutically approved for mCRPC with HRD alterations. Mutations are detected in metastatic tissue, while a liquid biopsy is utilized during follow-up, recognizing acquired resistance mechanisms. The mismatch repair (MMR) pathway is another DNA repair mechanism implicated in carcinogenesis, although only 5% of metastatic PCa is affected. It is associated with aggressive disease. PD-1 inhibitors have been used in MMR-deficient tumors; thus, the MMR status should be tested in all metastatic PCa cases. A surrogate marker of defective DNA repair mechanisms is the tumor mutational burden. PDL-1 expression and intratumoral lymphocytes have ambivalent predictive value. Few experimental molecules have been so far proposed as potential biomarkers. Future research may further elucidate the role of DNA damage pathways in PCa, revealing new therapeutic targets and predictive biomarkers.

Molecular testing of DNA damage response pathways in prostate cancer patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Personalizing prostate cancer therapy requires germline and tumor molecular tests that predict who will respond to specific treatments and who may not. The review covers molecular testing of DNA damage response pathways, the first biomarker-driven precision target with clinical utility for treatment selection in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recurrent somatic and germline variants cause deficiency of the mismatch repair (MMR) or homologous recombination (HR) pathways in about a quarter of CRPC patients. In prospective clinical trials, patients with deleterious variants in the MMR pathway more frequently experience a therapeutic response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Similarly, somatic and germline events affecting HR predict response to poly(ADP) ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) therapy. Molecular testing of these pathways currently involves assaying for loss of function variants in individual genes and for the genome-wide consequences of repair deficiency.

SUMMARY

DNA damage response pathways are the first major area of molecular genetic testing in CRPC settings and offer insights into this new paradigm. Our hope is that eventually an arsenal of molecularly-guided therapies will be developed across many pathways to enable precision medicine options for most men with prostate cancer.

Recent advances in the molecular targeted drugs for prostate cancer

CONTEXT

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second largest male tumor in the world and one of the most common malignant tumors in the urinary system. In recent years, the incidence rate of PCa in China has been increasing year by year. Meanwhile, refractory hormone resistance and adverse drug reactions of advanced PCa cause serious harm to patients.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aims to systematically review the recent advances in molecularly targeted drugs for prostate cancer and to use the retrieval and analysis of the literature library to summarize the adverse effects of different drugs so as to maximize the treatment benefits of targeted therapies.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic literature search of the Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases up to March 2022 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords such as (prostate cancer) AND (molecular target drugs) AND (side effect) were used. No language restrictions were set on the search process, and all these results were processed independently by two authors. Consensus was reached through discussion once met with any disagreements. The primary endpoint was differential features between different molecular targeted drugs. Secondary endpoints were side effects of different drugs on the body and corresponding prognostic values.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess the study quality in terms of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, the completeness of outcome data, selective reporting and other biases. We retrieved 332 articles, of which 49 met the criteria for inclusion. Included studies show that prostatic tumor cells, tumor neovascularization and immune checkpoints are the main means for targeted therapy. Common drugs include 177 Lu-PSMA, Olaparib, Rucaparib, Bevacizumab, Pazopanib, Sorafenib, Cabozantinib, Aflibercept, Ipilimumab, Atezolizumab, Avelumab, Durvalumab. A series of publicly available data suitable for further analysis of side effects. An over-representation analysis of these datasets revealed reasonable dosage and usage is the key to controlling the side effects of targeted drugs. Important information such as the publication year, the first author, location and outcome observation of adverse effects was extracted from the original article. If the study data has some insufficient data, contacting the corresponding authors is necessary. All the studies included prospective nonrandomized and randomized research. Retrospective reviews were also screened according to the relevant to the purpose of this study. Meeting abstracts as well as letters to the editor and editorials were excluded.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Data analysis was based on Cochrane's risk of bias tools to obtain the quality assessment. The included randomized studies used RoB2 and non-randomized ones corresponded to ROBINS-I. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were used to determine relative risk (RR) and side effects between groups. The eggers' test was used to check the publication bias from variable information in the included studies. All p < 0.05 were considered to be significant, and 95% was set as the confidence interval.

CONCLUSIONS

With the approval of a variety of targeted drugs, targeted therapy will be widely used in the treatment of advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. Despite the existence of adverse reactions related to targeted drug treatment, it is still meaningful to adjust the drug dosage or treatment cycle to reduce the occurrence of adverse reactions, improving the treatment benefits of patients.

Integrative analysis of ferroptosis regulators for clinical prognosis based on deep learning and potential chemotherapy sensitivity of prostate cancer

Exploring useful prognostic markers and developing a robust prognostic model for patients with prostate cancer are crucial for clinical practice. We applied a deep learning algorithm to construct a prognostic model and proposed the deep learning-based ferroptosis score (DLF_score) for the prediction of prognosis and potential chemotherapy sensitivity in prostate cancer. Based on this prognostic model, there was a statistically significant difference in the disease-free survival probability between patients with high and low DLF_score in the The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cohort (P < 0.0001). In the validation cohort GSE116918, we also observed a consistent conclusion with the training set (P = 0.02). Additionally, functional enrichment analysis showed that DNA repair, RNA splicing signaling, organelle assembly, and regulation of centrosome cycle pathways might regulate prostate cancer through ferroptosis. Meanwhile, the prognostic model we constructed also had application value in predicting drug sensitivity. We predicted some potential drugs for the treatment of prostate cancer through AutoDock, which could potentially be used for prostate cancer treatment.

Novel Insights into the Role of the Antioxidants in Prostate Pathology

To date, it is known that antioxidants protect cells from damage caused by oxidative stress and associated with pathological conditions. Several studies have established that inflammation is a state that anticipates the neoplastic transformation of the prostate. Although many experimental and clinical data have indicated the efficacy of antioxidants in preventing this form of cancer, the discrepant results, especially from recent large-scale randomized clinical trials, make it difficult to establish a real role for antioxidants in prostate tumor. Despite these concerns, clinical efficacy and safety data show that some antioxidants still hold promise for prostate cancer chemoprevention. Although more studies are needed, in this review, we briefly describe the most common antioxidants that have shown benefits in preclinical and clinical settings, focusing our attention on synthesizing the advances made so far in prostate cancer chemoprevention using antioxidants as interesting molecules for the challenges of future therapies.

Estimating copy number to determine BRCA2 deletion status and to expect prognosis in localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The significance of BRCA alterations has been implicated in the development of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PC). The details of the frequency and significance of BRCA alterations in localized PC remain unknown. In this study, we investigated the frequency and clinical significance of BRCA alterations in localized PCs using an in-house next-generation sequencer (NGS) system.

METHODS

DNA was extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues of surgical specimens from 126 patients with clinically localized PC who underwent radical prostatectomy. The mutation information of 164 cancer genes was analyzed using the PleSSision-Rapid test. Both copy number (CN) variation and loss of heterozygosity of various genes, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, were estimated and reported.

RESULTS

Next-generation sequencer analyses revealed that the BRCA2 CN was decreased in 17 patients (13.5%) and the BRCA1 CN in six (4.8%) patients. NGS-based CN values were shown to be highly correlated with droplet digital PCR-based CN values. Tissue-specific BRCA expression investigated using the Human Protein Atlas showed that the decreased CN of BRCA2, but not BRCA1, is responsible for the decreased BRCA activity in PC. Ten of the 22 patients with decreased BRCA2 CN were presumed to have somatic heterozygous deletion. There were no observed associations between the heterozygous deletion of BRCA2 and various clinicopathological parameters. Furthermore, three of 10 patients developed biochemical recurrence within 3 months after surgery. Multivariate analyses revealed that the initial prostate-specific antigen levels and BRCA2 CN were independent factors for biochemical recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a decrease in BRCA2 CN may be used as a biomarker for predicting recurrence after surgery in localized PC. Early screening for somatic alterations in BRCA2 using NGS may help to broadly predict the risk of PC progression.

Prostate cancer risk, screening and management in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations

Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumour suppressor genes are associated with prostate cancer risk; however, optimal screening protocols for individuals with these mutations have been a subject of debate. Several prospective studies of prostate cancer incidence and screening among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have indicated at least a twofold to fourfold increase in prostate cancer risk among carriers of BRCA2 mutations compared with the general population. Moreover, BRCA2 mutations are associated with more aggressive, high-grade disease characteristics at diagnosis, more aggressive clinical behaviour and greater prostate cancer-specific mortality. The risk for BRCA1 mutations seems to be attenuated compared with BRCA2. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement or prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone is an imperfect indicator of clinically significant prostate cancer; therefore, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers might benefit from refined risk stratification strategies. However, the long-term impact of prostate cancer screening is unknown, and the optimal management of BRCA1/2 carriers with prostate cancer has not been defined. Whether timely localized therapy can improve overall survival in the screened population is uncertain. Long-term results of prospective studies are awaited to confirm the optimal screening strategies and benefits of prostate cancer screening among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, and whether these approaches ultimately have a positive impact on survival and quality of life in these patients.

A systematic review on the association between ovarian and prostate cancer with <I>BRCA1</I> and <I>BRCA2</I> gene

Background. BRCA1 and BRCA2 were discussed as the basis of inherited adenocarcinoma and breast and ovarian malignancy. Ovarian cancer is uncommon in women below 40 years of age, and prostate cancer mainly occurs in older men cause 90 % in those above sixty-fve.

Objective. The main objective of this paper is to investigate the relationship between ovarian and prostate cancer with the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.

Material and Methods. The ovarian and prostate cancer mechanism is discussed in detail, and their preventive measures with screening techniques are also demonstrated. This systematic review collected the related articles from online databases using the key terms ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, BRCA genes, mutation, polymorphism, carcinoma, sarcoma, and genetic association.

Results. Based on the obtained information, it is found that the BRCA genes are highly associated with prostate cancer in men, and in women, it is significantly linked with breast cancer than ovarian cancer.

Conclusion. Therefore, early diagnosis and genetic testing for BRCA1&BRCA2 genes in both men and women are necessary. In some cases, these genes might even cause different types of cancer like pancreatic cancers. Identifying individuals with tumour-HRD through mutations in the homologous repair pathway and determining this gene expression is essential to improve treatment techniques developed during the previous decade and rapidly make their way into clinical trials practice. However, the safe introduction of these medicines into everyday practice will require a thorough understanding of treatment targets and associated adverse effects. 

The Clinical Impact of Comedonecrosis Within Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate

CONTEXT.—

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is considered a distinct form of aggressive prostate cancer where comedonecrosis, a grade 5 pattern, is occasionally present. Meanwhile, assigning a Gleason grade to IDC-P remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE.—

To assess the clinical significance of necrosis associated with IDC-P.

DESIGN.—

We compared radical prostatectomy (RP) findings and oncologic outcomes in men with prostate cancer exhibiting IDC-P with (IDC-P+/N+) versus without (IDC-P+/N-) comedonecrosis.

RESULTS.—

Of the 558 RPs examined, IDC-P was present in 213 cases (38.2%), including 167 (78.4%) with IDC-P+/N- and 46 (21.6%) with IDC-P+/N+. When comparing IDC-P+/N- versus IDC-P+/N+ cases, the presence of necrosis was significantly associated with higher tumor grade, higher incidence of pT3/pT3b or pN1 disease, and larger estimated tumor volume. Outcome analysis revealed a significantly higher risk of disease progression in IDC-P+/N+ patients than in IDC-P+/N- patients (P < .001). Significant differences in progression-free survival between IDC-P+/N- and IDC-P+/N+ patients were also seen in subgroups, such as those without (P = .01) or with (P = .03) adjuvant therapy immediately after RP, those with pN0 disease (P < .001), and, more interestingly, those exhibiting conventional Gleason pattern 5 component (P = .02). Multivariate analysis showed significance for IDC-P+/N+ when IDC-P (grade 4) and IDC-P+/N+ (grade 5) were (hazard ratio, 1.768; P = .049) or were not (hazard ratio, 2.000; P = .008) incorporated into the Gleason score.

CONCLUSIONS.—

IDC-P+/N+ was found to be associated with worse histopathologic features on RP and poorer prognosis as an independent predictor. Pathologists may thus need to report the presence or absence of not only IDC-P but also comedonecrosis within IDC-P.

Prostate Cancer Transcriptomic Regulation by the Interplay of Germline Risk Alleles, Somatic Mutations, and 3D Genomic Architecture

Prostate cancer is one of the most heritable human cancers. Genome-wide association studies have identified at least 185 prostate cancer germline risk alleles, most noncoding. We used integrative three-dimensional (3D) spatial genomics to identify the chromatin interaction targets of 45 prostate cancer risk alleles, 31 of which were associated with the transcriptional regulation of target genes in 565 localized prostate tumors. To supplement these 31, we verified transcriptional targets for 56 additional risk alleles using linear proximity and linkage disequilibrium analysis in localized prostate tumors. Some individual risk alleles influenced multiple target genes; others specifically influenced only distal genes while leaving proximal ones unaffected. Several risk alleles exhibited widespread germline-somatic interactions in transcriptional regulation, having different effects in tumors with loss of PTEN or RB1 relative to those without. These data clarify functional prostate cancer risk alleles in large linkage blocks and outline a strategy to model multidimensional transcriptional regulation.

SIGNIFICANCE

Many prostate cancer germline risk alleles are enriched in the noncoding regions of the genome and are hypothesized to regulate transcription. We present a 3D genomics framework to unravel risk SNP function and describe the widespread germline-somatic interplay in transcription control. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2711.

Complexities of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer has a long disease history and a wide variety and uncertainty in individual patients' clinical progress. In recent years, we have seen a revolutionary advance in both prostate cancer patient care and in the research field. The power of deep sequencing has provided cistromic and transcriptomic knowledge of prostate cancer that has not discovered before. Our understanding of prostate cancer biology, from bedside and molecular imaging techniques, has also been greatly advanced. It is important that our current theragnostic schemes, including our diagnostic modalities, therapeutic responses, and the drugs available to target non-AR signaling should be improved. This review article discusses the current progress in the understanding of prostate cancer biology and the recent advances in diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

Biomarkers beyond BRCA: promising combinatorial treatment strategies in overcoming resistance to PARP inhibitors

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) exploit the concept of synthetic lethality and offer great promise in the treatment of tumors with deficiencies in homologous recombination (HR) repair. PARPi exert antitumor activity by blocking Poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation (PARylation) and trapping PARP1 on damaged DNA. To date, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved four PARPi for the treatment of several cancer types including ovarian, breast, pancreatic and prostate cancer. Although patients with HR-deficient tumors benefit from PARPi, majority of tumors ultimately develop acquired resistance to PARPi. Furthermore, even though BRCA1/2 mutations are commonly used as markers of PARPi sensitivity in current clinical practice, not all patients with BRCA1/2 mutations have PARPi-sensitive disease. Thus, there is an urgent need to elucidate the molecular mechanisms of PARPi resistance to support the development of rational effective treatment strategies aimed at overcoming resistance to PARPi, as well as reliable biomarkers to accurately identify patients who will most likely benefit from treatment with PARPi, either as monotherapy or in combination with other agents, so called marker-guided effective therapy (Mget). In this review, we summarize the molecular mechanisms driving the efficacy of and resistance to PARPi as well as emerging therapeutic strategies to overcome PARPi resistance. We also highlight the identification of potential markers to predict PARPi resistance and guide promising PARPi-based combination strategies.

Hidden clues in prostate cancer - Lessons learned from clinical and pre-clinical approaches on diagnosis and risk stratification

The heterogeneity of prostate cancer is evident at clinical, morphological and molecular levels. To aid clinical decision making, a three-tiered system for risk stratification is used to designate low-, intermediate-, and high-risk of disease progression. Intermediate-risk prostate cancers are the most frequently diagnosed, and even with common diagnostic features, can exhibit vastly different clinical progression. Thus, improved risk stratification methods are needed to better predict patient outcomes. Here, we provide an overview of the improvements in diagnosis/prognosis arising from advances in pathology reporting of prostate cancer, which can improve risk stratification, especially for patients with intermediate-risk disease. This review discusses updates to pathology reporting of morphological growth patterns, and proposes the utility of integrating prognostic biomarkers or innovative imaging techniques to enhance clinical decision-making. To complement clinical studies, experimental approaches using patient-derived tumors have highlighted important cellular and morphological features associated with aggressive disease that may impact treatment response. The intersection of urology, pathology and scientific disciplines is required to work towards a common goal of understanding disease pathogenesis, improving the stratification of patients with intermediate-risk disease and subsequently defining optimal treatment strategies using precision-based approaches.

Homologous Recombination Deficiencies and Hereditary Tumors

Homologous recombination (HR) is a vital process for repairing DNA double-strand breaks. Germline variants in the HR pathway, comprising at least 10 genes, such as BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CHEK2, NBS1(NBN), PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D, lead to inherited susceptibility to specific types of cancers, including those of the breast, ovaries, prostate, and pancreas. The penetrance of germline pathogenic variants of each gene varies, whereas all their associated protein products are indispensable for maintaining a high-fidelity DNA repair system by HR. The present review summarizes the basic molecular mechanisms and components that collectively play a role in maintaining genomic integrity against DNA double-strand damage and their clinical implications on each type of hereditary tumor.

Genomic Features and Clinical Implications of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is a rare and unique form of aggressive prostate carcinoma, which is characterized by an expansile proliferation of malignant prostatic epithelial cells within prostatic ducts or acini and the preservation of basal cell layers around the involved glands. The vast majority of IDC-P tumors result from adjacent high-grade invasive cancer via the retrograde spreading of tumor cells into normal prostatic ducts or acini. A subset of IDC-P tumors is rarely derived from the de novo intraductal proliferation of premalignant cells. The presence of IDC-P in biopsy or surgical specimens is significantly associated with aggressive pathologic features, such as high Gleason grade, large tumor volume, and advanced tumor stage, and with poor clinical courses, including earlier biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis, and worse survival outcomes. These architectural and behavioral features of IDC-P may be driven by specific molecular properties. Notably, IDC-P possesses distinct genomic profiles, including higher rates of TMPRSS2–ERG gene fusions and PTEN loss, increased percentage of genomic instability, and higher prevalence of germline BRCA2 mutations. Considering that IDC-P tumors are usually resistant to conventional therapies for prostate cancer, further studies should be performed to develop optimal therapeutic strategies based on distinct genomic features, such as treatment with immune checkpoint blockades or poly (adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase inhibitors for patients harboring increased genomic instability or BRCA2 mutations, as well as genetic counseling with genetic testing. Patient-derived xenografts and tumor organoid models can be the promising in vitro platforms for investigating the molecular features of IDC-P tumor.

Pathogenic BRCA Variants as Biomarkers for Risk in Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

Historically, the treatment of prostate cancer was a blanket approach for all. Prostate cancer has not benefitted from targeted treatments based on specific tumour characteristics (ie. Particular genetic or molecular patterns) the way other cancers have. This is important as studies have shown that prostate cancer patients with certain errors in their genes, such as BRCA2 or BRCA1, are more likely to have worse disease and poorer outcome. These patients can be treated successfully with a group of drugs called ‘PARP inhibitors’. This paper examines the prognostic, clinical and therapeutic role of BRCA2/BRCA1 mutations across the evolution of PCa. The impact of the inclusion of BRCA genes on genetic screening will also be outlined.

Abstract

Studies have demonstrated that men with Prostate Cancer (PCa) harboring BRCA2/BRCA1 genetic aberrations, are more likely to have worse disease and a poorer prognosis. A mutation in BRCA2 is known to confer the highest risk of PCa for men (8.6 fold in men ≤65 years) making BRCA genes a conceivable genomic biomarker for risk in PCa. These genes have attracted a lot of research attention however their role in the clinical assessment and treatment of PCa remains complex. Multiple studies have been published examining the relationship between prostate cancer and BRCA mutations. Here BRCA mutations are explored specifically as a biomarker for risk in PCa. It is in this context, we examined the prognostic, clinical and therapeutic role of BRCA2/BRCA1 mutations across the evolution of PCa. The impact of the inclusion of BRCA genes on genetic screening will also be outlined.

Somatic driver mutation prevalence in 1844 prostate cancers identifies ZNRF3 loss as a predictor of metastatic relapse

Driver gene mutations that are more prevalent in metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) than localized disease represent candidate prognostic biomarkers. We analyze 1,844 localized (1,289) or mCRPC (555) tumors and quantify the prevalence of 113 somatic driver single nucleotide variants (SNVs), copy number aberrations (CNAs), and structural variants (SVs) in each state. One-third are significantly more prevalent in mCRPC than expected while a quarter are less prevalent. Mutations in AR and its enhancer are more prevalent in mCRPC, as are those in TP53, MYC, ZNRF3 and PRKDC. ZNRF3 loss is associated with decreased ZNRF3 mRNA abundance, WNT, cell cycle & PRC1/2 activity, and genomic instability. ZNRF3 loss, RNA downregulation and hypermethylation are prognostic of metastasis and overall survival, independent of clinical and pathologic indices. These data demonstrate a strategy for identifying biomarkers of localized cancer aggression, with ZNRF3 loss as a predictor of metastasis in prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer

The management of prostate cancer continues to evolve rapidly, with substantial advances being made in understanding the genomic landscape and biology underpinning both primary and metastatic prostate cancer. Similarly, the emergence of more sensitive imaging methods has improved diagnostic and staging accuracy and refined surveillance strategies. These advances have introduced personalised therapeutics to clinical practice, with treatments targeting genomic alterations in DNA repair pathways now clinically validated. An important shift in the therapeutic framework for metastatic disease has taken place, with metastatic-directed therapies being evaluated for oligometastatic disease, aggressive management of the primary lesion shown to benefit patients with low-volume metastatic disease, and with several novel androgen pathway inhibitors significantly improving survival when used as a first-line therapy for metastatic disease. Research into the molecular characterisation of localised, recurrent, and progressive disease will undoubtedly have an impact on clinical management. Similarly, emerging research into novel therapeutics, such as targeted radioisotopes and immunotherapy, holds much promise for improving the lives of patients with prostate cancer.

Common genetic and clinical risk factors: association with fatal prostate cancer in the Cohort of Swedish Men

BACKGROUND

Clinical variables-age, family history, genetics-are used for prostate cancer risk stratification. Recently, polygenic hazard scores (PHS46, PHS166) were validated as associated with age at prostate cancer diagnosis. While polygenic scores are associated with all prostate cancer (not specific for fatal cancers), PHS46 was also associated with age at prostate cancer death. We evaluated if adding PHS to clinical variables improves associations with prostate cancer death.

METHODS

Genotype/phenotype data were obtained from a nested case-control Cohort of Swedish Men (n = 3279; 2163 with prostate cancer, 278 prostate cancer deaths). PHS and clinical variables (family history, alcohol intake, smoking, heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, body mass index) were tested via univariable Cox proportional hazards models for association with age at prostate cancer death. Multivariable Cox models with/without PHS were compared with log-likelihood tests.

RESULTS

Median age at last follow-up/prostate cancer death was 78.0 (IQR: 72.3-84.1) and 81.4 (75.4-86.3) years, respectively. On univariable analysis, PHS46 (HR 3.41 [95% CI 2.78-4.17]), family history (HR 1.72 [1.46-2.03]), alcohol (HR 1.74 [1.40-2.15]), diabetes (HR 0.53 [0.37-0.75]) were each associated with prostate cancer death. On multivariable analysis, PHS46 (HR 2.45 [1.99-2.97]), family history (HR 1.73 [1.48-2.03]), alcohol (HR 1.45 [1.19-1.76]), diabetes (HR 0.62 [0.42-0.90]) all remained associated with fatal disease. Including PHS46 or PHS166 improved multivariable models for fatal prostate cancer (p < 10^-15).

CONCLUSIONS

PHS had the most robust association with fatal prostate cancer in a multivariable model with common risk factors, including family history. Adding PHS to clinical variables may improve prostate cancer risk stratification strategies.

Management of a Prostate Cancer Patient With Inherited Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations: A Case Report

The Breast Cancer Gene (BRCA) confers an 8.6-fold higher risk of developing prostate cancer in men ≤ 65 years of age and portends a worse prognosis as compared to noncarriers even in patients with low volume, localized disease. The BRCA2 gene, in particular, imparts a more biologically aggressive form of prostate cancer and a higher prostate cancer specific mortality. From a treatment standpoint, this translates to worse overall clinical outcomes for such patients. The most appropriate screening and management strategy for germline BRCA mutation carriers with prostate cancer is not known. Herein, we present an incidentally discovered prostate cancer in a 61-year-old BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutation carrier who was screened and managed using an individualized treatment approach.

Targeting Loss of Heterozygosity: A Novel Paradigm for Cancer Therapy

Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) is a common genetic event in the development of cancer. In certain tumor types, LOH can affect more than 20% of the genome, entailing loss of allelic variation in thousands of genes. This reduction of heterozygosity creates genetic differences between tumor and normal cells, providing opportunities for development of novel cancer therapies. Here, we review and summarize (1) mutations associated with LOH on chromosomes which have been shown to be promising biomarkers of cancer risk or the prediction of clinical outcomes in certain types of tumors; (2) loci undergoing LOH that can be targeted for development of novel anticancer drugs as well as (3) LOH in tumors provides up-and-coming possibilities to understand the underlying mechanisms of cancer evolution and to discover novel cancer vulnerabilities which are worth a further investigation in the near future.

Genetic counseling in prostate cancer: How to implement it in daily clinical practice?

Prostate cancer plays an undeniably prominent role in public health in our days and health systems. Its epidemiological impact is quantitatively very close to that of other tumors such as colon cancer and breast cancer, in which genetic counseling is part of their routine clinical practice, both in the initial evaluation and in the selection of therapeutic strategies. Hereditary cancer syndromes, breast/ovarian and Lynch syndrome are part of genetic counseling in these tumors. Currently, we also know that they can be associated to prostate cancer. The time has come to implement genetic counseling in prostate cancer from the earliest stages of its approach, from initial suspicion to the most advanced tumors. We present an updated review carried out by our interdisciplinary working group on scientific literature, clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents, aimed at the creation and drafting of a'Protocol for genetic counseling in prostate cancer' for the study of germline, with easy application in different healthcare settings. This protocol is currently being implemented in our routine practice and provides answers to 3 specific questions: Who should receive genetic counseling for prostate cancer? Which gene panel should be analyzed? How should counseling be done according to the results obtained? Other aspects about who should perform genetic counseling, ethical considerations and regulations are also collected.

Clinical proteomics for prostate cancer: understanding prostate cancer pathology and protein biomarkers for improved disease management

Following the introduction of routine Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) screening in the early 1990′s, Prostate Cancer (PCa) is often detected at an early stage. There are also a growing number of treatment options available and so the associated mortality rate is generally low. However, PCa is an extremely complex and heterogenous disease and many patients suffer disease recurrence following initial therapy. Disease recurrence commonly results in metastasis and metastatic PCa has an average survival rate of just 3–5 years. A significant problem in the clinical management of PCa is being able to differentiate between patients who will respond to standard therapies and those who may benefit from more aggressive intervention at an earlier stage. It is also acknowledged that for many men the disease is not life threatenting. Hence, there is a growing desire to identify patients who can be spared the significant side effects associated with PCa treatment until such time (if ever) their disease progresses to the point where treatment is required. To these important clinical needs, current biomarkers and clinical methods for patient stratification and personlised treatment are insufficient. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the complexities of PCa pathology and disease management. In this context it is possible to review current biomarkers and proteomic technologies that will support development of biomarker-driven decision tools to meet current important clinical needs. With such an in-depth understanding of disease pathology, the development of novel clinical biomarkers can proceed in an efficient and effective manner, such that they have a better chance of improving patient outcomes.

Potential biomarkers and risk assessment models to enhance the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging classification of urologic cancers

INTRODUCTION

The anatomic-based TNM classification is considered the benchmark in cancer staging and has been regularly updated since its inception. In the current era of precision medicine, the added intention for future TNM modifications is to heighten its impact in the more 'personalized' level of cancer care. In urologic cancers, this goal may be achieved by incorporating 'non-anatomic' factors into TNM, such as biomarkers (e.g. gene alterations, molecular subtypes, genomic classifiers) and risk assessment models (e.g. nomogram, look-up table), while maintaining the anatomic extent as the foundation of staging. These different prognosticators can be combined and integrated, may serve as substratifiers for T, N, or M categories, and perhaps, incorporated as elements in TNM stage groupings to enhance their prognostic capability in urologic cancers.

AREAS COVERED

This review highlights candidate biomarkers and risk assessment models that can be explored to potentially improve TNM prognostication of bladder, prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers.

EXPERT OPINION

Recent advances in molecular analysis have increased the understanding of the genomic, transcriptomic, and epigenetic features for biomarker use in prognostication of urologic cancers, which together with the available risk assessment models, may complement and overcome the limitations of the traditional TNM staging.

Imaging-based prostate cancer screening among BRCA mutation carriers-results from the first round of screening

BACKGROUND

Male-carriers of BRCA1/2 gene mutations have an increased risk of prostate cancer (PCa) with a more aggressive phenotype. Current screening-guidelines suggest the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) only among BRCA2 carriers. Female carriers have extensive guidelines that include imaging. Our objective was to test the prevalence of PCa among BRCA carriers and examine screening strategies, using PSA and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We recruited men aged 40-70 years with BRCA1/2 germline mutations and no prior history of prostate biopsy. All men underwent an initial round of screening which included PSA, and prostate mpMRI. PSA was considered elevated using an age-stratified threshold of ≥1 ng/ml for 40-50 years of age, ≥2 ng/ml for 50-60 years of age, and 2.5 ng/ml for 60-70 years of age. Men with elevated PSA and/or suspicious lesion on mpMRI were offered a prostate biopsy. PSA levels, MRI findings, PCa incidence, and tumor characteristics were evaluated. Decision curve analysis was used to compare screening strategies.

RESULTS

We recruited 188 men (108 BRCA1, 80 BRCA2), mean age 54 years (9.8). One hundred and ten (57%) had either elevated age-stratified PSA (75; 40%), a suspicious MRI lesion (67; 36%), or both (32; 17%). Of these, 92 (85%) agreed to perform a prostate biopsy. Sixteen (8.5%) were diagnosed with PCa; 44% of the tumors were classified as intermediate- or high-risk disease. mpMRI-based screening missed only one of the cancers (6%), while age-stratified PSA would have missed five (31%). Decision curve analysis showed that mpMRI screening, regardless of PSA, had the highest net benefit for PCa diagnosis, especially among men younger than 55 years of age. We found no difference in the risk of PCa between BRCA1 and BRCA2 (8.3% versus 8.7%, P = 0.91). Ninety percent had a Jewish founder mutation, thus the results cannot be generalized to all ethnic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PCa is prevalent among BRCA carriers. Age may affect screening strategy for PCa in this population. Young carriers could benefit from initial MRI screening. BRCA carriers aged older than 55 years should use PSA and be referred to mpMRI if elevated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT02053805.

Effect of core needle biopsy number on intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) diagnosis in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The number of core needle biopsies in metastatic prostate cancer cases are sometimes reduced to avoid various complications. We analyzed whether core needle biopsy number influence IDC-P detection rate in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data from 150 patients diagnosed with mHSPC. Subjects were allocated to three groups according to the number of core biopsies performed: ≤ 5, 6-9, and ≥ 10. The study endpoints were the cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) rates.

RESULTS

For patients who underwent ≥ 10 core biopsies, a significant difference on CSS was detected between with or without IDC-P (P = 0.016). On the other hand, the difference decreased as the number of core biopsies became smaller (6-9; P = 0.322 and ≤ 5; P = 0.815). A similar trend was identified for the OS outcome. A significant difference on OS was also found between with or without IDC-P in patients who underwent ≥ 10 and 6-9 core needle biopsies (P = 0.0002 and 0.017, respectively), but not in those who underwent ≤ 5 core biopsies (P = 0.341). IDC-P served as a stronger prognostic marker for CSS and OS than did the other factors included in the multivariate analysis for patients had ≥ 10 core biopsies (P = 0.016, and P = 0.0014, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the IDC-P detection and its value as a prognostic marker, we propose the performance of ≥ 10 core biopsy procedures in patients diagnosed with mHSPC to minimize the sampling error of the IDC-P.

Reporting Practices and Resource Utilization in the Era of Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: A Survey of Genitourinary Subspecialists

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) has been recently recognized by the World Health Organization classification of prostatic tumors as a distinct entity, most often occurring concurrently with invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma (PCa). Whether documented admixed with PCa or in its rare pure form, numerous studies associate this entity with clinical aggressiveness. Despite increasing clinical experience and requirement of IDC-P documentation in protocols for synoptic reporting, the specifics of its potential contribution to assessment of grade group (GG) and cancer quantitation of PCa in both needle biopsies (NBx) and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens remain unclear. Moreover, there are no standard guidelines for incorporating basal cell marker immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the diagnosis of IDC-P, either alone or as part of a cocktail with AMACR/racemase. An online survey containing 26 questions regarding diagnosis, reporting practices, and IHC resource utilization, focusing on IDC-P, was undertaken by 42 genitourinary subspecialists from 9 countries. The degree of agreement or disagreement regarding approaches to individual questions was classified as significant majority (>75%), majority (51% to 75%), minority (26% to 50%) and significant minority (≤25%). IDC-P with or without invasive cancer is considered a contraindication for active surveillance by the significant majority (95%) of respondents, although a majority (66%) also agreed that the clinical significance/behavior of IDC-P on NBx or RP with PCa required further study. The majority do not upgrade PCa based on comedonecrosis seen only in the intraductal component in NBx (62%) or RP (69%) specimens. Similarly, recognizable IDC-P with GG1 PCa was not a factor in upgrading in NBx (78%) or RP (71%) specimens. The majority (60%) of respondents include readily recognizable IDC-P in assessment of linear extent of PCa at NBx. A significant majority (78%) would use IHC to confirm or exclude intraductal carcinoma if other biopsies showed no PCa, while 60% would use it to confirm IDC-P with invasive PCa in NBx if it would change the overall GG assignment. Nearly half (48%, a minority) would use IHC to confirm IDC-P for accurate Gleason pattern 4 quantitation. A majority (57%) report the percentage of IDC-P when present, in RP specimens. When obvious Gleason pattern 4 or 5 PCa is present in RP or NBx, IHC is rarely to almost never used to confirm the presence of IDC-P by the significant majority (88% and 90%, respectively). Most genitourinary pathologists consider IDC-P to be an adverse prognostic feature independent of the PCa grade, although recommendations for standardization are needed to guide reporting of IDC-P vis a vis tumor quantitation and final GG assessment. The use of IHC varies widely and is performed for a multitude of indications, although it is used most frequently in scenarios where confirmation of IDC-P would impact the GG assigned. Further study and best practices recommendations are needed to provide guidance with regards to the most appropriate indications for IHC use in scenarios regarding IDC-P.

Harnessing the potential of multimodal radiotherapy in prostate cancer

Radiotherapy in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a standard treatment option for men with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, emerging clinical evidence suggests that radiotherapy can be incorporated into multimodality therapy regimens beyond ADT, in combinations that include chemotherapy, radiosensitizing agents, immunotherapy and surgery for the treatment of men with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer, and those with oligometastatic disease, in whom the low metastatic burden in particular might be treatable with these combinations. This multimodal approach is increasingly recognized as offering considerable clinical benefit, such as increased antitumour effects and improved survival. Thus, radiotherapy is becoming a key component of multimodal therapy for many stages of prostate cancer, particularly oligometastatic disease.

Mutational and transcriptomic landscapes of a rare human prostate basal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

As a rare subtype of prostate carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma (BCC) has not been studied extensively and thus lacks systematic molecular characterization.

METHODS

Here, we applied single-cell genomic amplification and RNA-Seq to a specimen of human prostate BCC (CK34βE12⁺ /P63⁺ /PAP^- /PSA^- ). The mutational landscape was obtained via whole exome sequencing of the amplification mixture of 49 single cells, and the transcriptomes of 69 single cells were also obtained.

RESULTS

The five putative driver genes mutated in BCC are CASC5, NUTM1, PTPRC, KMT2C, and TBX3, and the top three nucleotide substitutions are C>T, T>C, and C>A, similar to common prostate cancer. The distribution of the variant allele frequency values indicated that these single cells are from the same tumor clone. The 69 single cells were clustered into tumor, stromal, and immune cells based on their global transcriptomic profiles. The tumor cells specifically express basal cell markers like KRT5, KRT14, and KRT23 and epithelial markers EPCAM, CDH1, and CD24. The transcription factor covariance network analysis showed that the BCC tumor cells have distinct regulatory networks. By comparison with current prostate cancer datasets, we found that some of the bulk samples exhibit basal cell signatures. Interestingly, at single-cell resolution the gene expression patterns of prostate BCC tumor cells show uniqueness compared with that of common prostate cancer-derived circulating tumor cells.

CONCLUSIONS

This study, for the first time, discloses the comprehensive mutational and transcriptomic landscapes of prostate BCC, which lays a foundation for the understanding of its tumorigenesis mechanism and provides new insights into prostate cancers in general.

PARP and PARG inhibitors in cancer treatment

In this review, Slade provides an overview of the molecular mechanisms and cellular consequences of PARP and PARG inhibition. The author also highlights the clinical performance of four PARP inhibitors used in cancer therapy (olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, and talazoparib) and discusses the predictive biomarkers of inhibitor sensitivity and mechanisms of resistance as well as the means of overcoming them through combination therapy.

Oxidative and replication stress underlie genomic instability of cancer cells. Amplifying genomic instability through radiotherapy and chemotherapy has been a powerful but nonselective means of killing cancer cells. Precision medicine has revolutionized cancer therapy by putting forth the concept of selective targeting of cancer cells. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors represent a successful example of precision medicine as the first drugs targeting DNA damage response to have entered the clinic. PARP inhibitors act through synthetic lethality with mutations in DNA repair genes and were approved for the treatment of BRCA mutated ovarian and breast cancer. PARP inhibitors destabilize replication forks through PARP DNA entrapment and induce cell death through replication stress-induced mitotic catastrophe. Inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG) exploit and exacerbate replication deficiencies of cancer cells and may complement PARP inhibitors in targeting a broad range of cancer types with different sources of genomic instability. Here I provide an overview of the molecular mechanisms and cellular consequences of PARP and PARG inhibition. I highlight clinical performance of four PARP inhibitors used in cancer therapy (olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, and talazoparib) and discuss the predictive biomarkers of inhibitor sensitivity, mechanisms of resistance as well as the means of overcoming them through combination therapy.

Response of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate to androgen deprivation therapy predicts prostate cancer prognosis in radical prostatectomy patients

BACKGROUND

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) has a poor prognosis and is thought to be completely resistant to current therapies, including androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, to date, there are no data showing direct evidence of such resistance.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 145 patients with high-risk prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) with neoadjuvant ADT between 1991 and 2005. All patient data were collected from slides prepared from needle biopsy (NB) samples of prostate tissue and RP specimens. Data were analyzed in terms of serum level of prostate specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score of NB samples, clinical T stage, the positive cancer core rate, maximum cancer extension rate, presence of Gleason pattern 5, and presence of IDC-P in both NB samples and RP specimens.

RESULTS

The median initial PSA was 33.2 ng/mL (range, 2.4-296 ng/mL), and the median follow-up period was 109 months (range, 11-257 months). The preoperative median ADT period was 4 months (range, 1-20 months). IDC-P was present in 53 patients (37%) in NB samples and 65 (45%) in RP. The patients were divided into three groups based on the presence or absence of IDC-P in NB/RP samples (IDC-P-negative at biopsy: 92 cases, IDC-P-positive at biopsy with IDC-P disappearance: 15 cases, and IDC-P-positive at biopsy with IDC-P persistence: 38 cases). Overall, 28% of IDC-P-positive cases in NB samples showed the disappearance of IDC-P at RP. IDC-P persistence cases showed the poorest prognosis, while IDC-P disappearance cases had a similar prognosis to that of IDC-P-negative at biopsy cases in terms of disease-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival (P = .0018, P = .0087, and P = .0034, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Some cases with IDC-P responded to ADT and demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes similar to those of cases without IDC-P. These findings indicate that cases with IDC-P are heterogeneous.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019

BACKGROUND

Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but there are still many aspects of management that lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 addressed some of these topics to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To present the results from the APCCC 2019.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Similar to prior conferences, experts identified 10 important areas of controversy regarding the management of advanced prostate cancer: locally advanced disease, biochemical recurrence after local therapy, treating the primary tumour in the metastatic setting, metastatic hormone-sensitive/naïve prostate cancer, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, bone health and bone metastases, molecular characterisation of tissue and blood, inter- and intrapatient heterogeneity, and adverse effects of hormonal therapy and their management. A panel of 72 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 123 predefined questions, which were developed by both voting and nonvoting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Panellists voted based on their opinions rather than a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions had varying degrees of support by the panel, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results from a panel of prostate cancer experts can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of advanced prostate management for which high-level evidence is sparse. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient-specific factors, such as disease extent and location, prior lines of therapy, comorbidities, and treatment preferences, together with current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Clinical trial enrolment for men with advanced prostate cancer should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2019 once again identified important questions that merit assessment in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference, which has been held three times since 2015, aims to share the knowledge of world experts in prostate cancer management with health care providers worldwide. At the end of the conference, an expert panel discusses and votes on predefined consensus questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision making.

BRCA2 gene mutation and prostate cancer risk. Comprehensive review and update

The second most common type of tumor worldwide is prostate cancer (PCa). Certain genetic factors contribute to a risk of developing PCa of as much as 40%. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have linked with an increased risk for breast, ovarian, and PCa. However, BRCA2 is the most common gene found altered in early-onset of PCa in males younger than 65. BRCA2 mutation has a higher chance of developing an advanced stage of the disease, resulting in short survival time. This review aimed to describe the genetic changes in BRCA2 that contribute to the risk of PCa, to define its role in the early diagnosis in a man with a strong family history, and to outline the purpose of genetic testing and counseling. Also, the review summarizes the impact of BRCA2 gene mutation in localized PCa, and the treatment strategies have used for PCa patients with a BRCA2 modification.

Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Prostate Cancer Development: Therapeutic Implications

Prostate cancer is the most frequent nonskin cancer and second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in man. Prostate cancer is a clinically heterogeneous disease with many patients exhibiting an aggressive disease with progression, metastasis, and other patients showing an indolent disease with low tendency to progression. Three stages of development of human prostate tumors have been identified: intraepithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma androgen-dependent, and adenocarcinoma androgen-independent or castration-resistant. Advances in molecular technologies have provided a very rapid progress in our understanding of the genomic events responsible for the initial development and progression of prostate cancer. These studies have shown that prostate cancer genome displays a relatively low mutation rate compared with other cancers and few chromosomal loss or gains. The ensemble of these molecular studies has led to suggest the existence of two main molecular groups of prostate cancers: one characterized by the presence of ERG rearrangements (~50% of prostate cancers harbor recurrent gene fusions involving ETS transcription factors, fusing the 5' untranslated region of the androgen-regulated gene TMPRSS2 to nearly the coding sequence of the ETS family transcription factor ERG) and features of chemoplexy (complex gene rearrangements developing from a coordinated and simultaneous molecular event), and a second one characterized by the absence of ERG rearrangements and by the frequent mutations in the E3 ubiquitin ligase adapter SPOP and/or deletion of CDH1, a chromatin remodeling factor, and interchromosomal rearrangements and SPOP mutations are early events during prostate cancer development. During disease progression, genomic and epigenomic abnormalities accrued and converged on prostate cancer pathways, leading to a highly heterogeneous transcriptomic landscape, characterized by a hyperactive androgen receptor signaling axis.