The Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance study

Diagnostic performance of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsies vs. systematic prostate biopsies in biopsy-naïve, previous negative biopsy patients and men undergoing active surveillance

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the detection rate of overall PCa and csPCa, and the clinical impact of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (FUSION-TB) compared to TRUS guided systematic biopsy (SB) in patients with different biopsy settings.

METHODS

Three hundred and five patients were submitted to FUSION-TB, divided into three groups: biopsy naïve patients, previous negative biopsies and patients under active surveillance (AS). All patients had a single suspicious index lesion at mpMRI. Within these groups, we enrolled men underwent both to FUSION-TB and SB in the same session. Overall detection rate of PCa and csPCa for the two biopsy methods were compared separately between the three groups of patients.

RESULTS

No differences were observed between the three groups concerning clinical and radiological characteristics. We found no differences in terms of overall PCa detection (66% vs. 63.8%, P=0.617) and csPCa detection (56.4% vs. 51.1%; P=0.225) concerning biopsy naïve patients. In patients previously submitted to a negative biopsy, FUSION-TB showed higher detection rate of csPCa compared to SB alone (41,3% vs. 27% respectively, P=0.038). In patients under AS, no differences were observed between FUSION-TB and SB in terms of overall PCa (50% vs. 73.1%) and csPCa (30.8% vs. 26.9%, respectively; P=0.705) detection.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that in men with previously negative biopsy, FUSION-TB showed significantly higher diagnostic performance for clinically significant PCa as compared to SB. Combination of FUSION-TB and SB should be recommended in AS population to offer higher chance of csPCa diagnosis.

Assessment of PSIM (Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers) Score in Predicting Pathologic Features at Robotic Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Who Met the Inclusion Criteria for Active Surveillance

BACKGROUND

circulating levels of lymphocytes, platelets and neutrophils have been identified as factors related to unfavorable clinical outcome for many solid tumors. The aim of this cohort study is to evaluate and validate the use of the Prostatic Systemic Inflammatory Markers (PSIM) score in predicting and improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy for low-risk prostate cancer who met the inclusion criteria for active surveillance.

METHODS

we reviewed the medical records of 260 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria for active surveillance. We performed a head-to-head comparison between the histological findings of specimens after radical prostatectomy (RP) and prostate biopsies. The PSIM score was calculated on the basis of positivity according to cutoffs (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) 2.0, platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) 118 and monocyte-to-lymphocyte-ratio (MLR) 5.0), with 1 point assigned for each value exceeding the specified threshold and then summed, yielding a final score ranging from 0 to 3.

RESULTS

median NLR was 2.07, median PLR was 114.83, median MLR was 3.69.

CONCLUSION

we found a significantly increase in the rate of pathological International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) ≥ 2 with the increase of PSIM. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume and PSIM, the latter was found the sole independent prognostic variable influencing probability of adverse pathology.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Prostate-Specific Antigen Density for Prediction of Gleason Score Upgrade in Patients With Low-Risk Prostate Cancer on Initial Biopsy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the utility of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) calculated using magnetic resonance imaging for predicting Gleason score (GS) upgrade in patients with low-risk prostate cancer on biopsy.

METHODS

Seventy-three patients were divided into 2 groups according to the concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy GS: group 1 (6/6) and group 2 (6/≥7). Magnetic resonance imaging-based PSAD, prostate volume, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and age were compared between the 2 groups. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Gleason score was upgraded in 40 patients. Patients in group 2 had significantly higher PSAD and PSA values and smaller prostate volume than did those in group 1. Prostate-specific antigen density of 0.26 ng/mL per cm or higher, PSA of 7.63 ng/mL or higher, and prostate volume of 25.1 cm or less were related to GS upgrade, with area-under-the-curve values of 0.765, 0.721, and 0.639, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnetic resonance imaging-based PSAD could help in predicting postoperative GS upgrade in patients with low-risk prostate cancer.

Low serum total testosterone level as a predictor of upstaging and upgrading in low-risk prostate cancer patients meeting the inclusion criteria for active surveillance

Active surveillance (AS) is currently a widely accepted treatment option for men with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa). Several reports have highlighted the association of low serum testosterone levels with high-grade, high-stage PCa. However, the impact of serum testosterone as a predictor of progression in men with low-risk PCa has been little assessed.

In this study, we evaluated the association of circulating testosterone concentrations with a staging/grading reclassification in a cohort of low-risk PCa patients meeting the inclusion criteria for the AS protocol but opting for radical prostatectomy.

Radical prostatectomy (RP) was performed in 338 patients, eligible for AS according to the following criteria: clinical stage T2a or less, PSA<10ng/ml, two or fewer cancer cores, Gleason score (GS)=6 and PSA density<0.2 ng/mL/cc. Reclassification was defined as upstaging (stage>pT2) and upgrading (GS=7; primary Gleason pattern 4) disease. Unfavorable disease was defined as the occurrence of pathological stage>pT2 and predominant Gleason score 4. Total testosterone was measured before surgery.

Low serum testosterone levels (<300 ng/dL) were significantly associated with upgrading, upstaging, unfavorable disease and positive surgical margins. The addition of testosterone to a base model, including age, PSA, PSA density, clinical stage and positive cancer involvement in cores, showed a significant independent influence of this variable on upstaging, upgrading and unfavorable disease.

In conclusion, our results support the idea that total testosterone should be a selection criterion for inclusion of low-risk PCa patients in AS programs and suggest that testosterone level less than 300 ng/dL should be considered a discouraging factor when a close AS program is considered as treatment option

An assessment of Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria for active surveillance of clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance is a strategy to delay or prevent treatment of indolent prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria were developed to select patients for prostate cancer active surveillance. The objective of this study was to compare pathological findings from PRIAS-eligible and PRIAS-ineligible clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

A D'Amico low-risk cohort of 1512 radical prostatectomy patients treated at The Ottawa Hospital or Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre between January 1995 and December 2007 was reviewed. Pathological outcomes (pT3 tumours, Gleason sum ≥7, lymph node metastases, or a composite) and clinical outcomes (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] recurrence, secondary cancer treatments, and death) were compared between PRIAS-eligible and PRIAS-ineligible cohorts.

RESULTS

The PRIAS-eligible cohort (n=945) was less likely to have Gleason score ≥7 (odds ratio [OR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.75), pT3 (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.31-0.55), nodal metastases (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.10-1.31), or any adverse feature (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.45-0.69) compared to the PRIAS-ineligible cohort. The probability of any adverse pathology in the PRIAS-eligible cohort was 41% vs. 56% in the PRIAS-ineligible cohort. At median follow-up of 3.7 years, 72 (4.8%) patients had a PSA recurrence, 24 (1.6%) received pelvic radiation, and 13 (0.9%) received androgen deprivation. No difference was detected for recurrence-free and overall survival between groups (recurrence hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; 95% CI 0.46-1.09 and survival HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.36-1.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-risk prostate cancer patients who met PRIAS eligibility criteria are less likely to have higher-risk cancer compared to those who did not meet at least one of these criteria.

A retrospective analysis of Victorian and South Australian clinical registries for prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and management of the disease

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy reported to Australian cancer registries with numerous studies from individual registries summarizing diagnostic and treatment characteristics. The aim of this study was to describe annual trends in clinical and treatment characteristics, and changes in surveillance practice within a large combined cohort of men with PCa in South Australia (SA) and Victoria, Australia in 2008-2013.

METHODS

Common data items from clinical registries in SA and Victoria were merged to develop a cross-jurisdictional dataset consisting of 13,598 men with PCa. Frequencies were used to describe these variables using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk of disease progression categories in 10 year age groups. A logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of a number of factors (both individually and together) on the likelihood of men receiving no active treatment within twelve months of the diagnosis (i.e. managed with active surveillance/watchful waiting).

RESULTS

Trend analysis showed that over time: (1) men in SA and Victoria are being diagnosed at older age in 2013, 66.1 (SD = 9.7) years compared to 2009 (64.5 (SD = 9.7)); (2) diagnostic methods and characteristics have changed with time; and (3) types of the treatments have changed, with more men having no active treatment. The majority of men were diagnosed with Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) <10 ng/mL (66 %) and Grade Group < 4 (65 %). Nearly seventy percent received radical treatment within 12 months of diagnosis, while ~20 % had no active treatment. In 14 % of cases treatment was not recorded or had not commenced. Having no active treatment was strongly associated older age, lower PSA and lower Grade Group at diagnosis, and in 2013 it was offered more frequently (more than 3 times) than in 2009 (OR = 2.63, 95 % CI: 2.16-3.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this study provide the first cross-jurisdictional description of PCa characteristics and management in Australia. These findings will provide benchmarking for ongoing monitoring and feedback of disease management and outcomes of PCa through the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry-Australia New Zealand to improve evidence-based practice.

Predicting Pathological Features at Radical Prostatectomy in Patients with Prostate Cancer Eligible for Active Surveillance by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score in predicting pathologic features in a cohort of patients eligible for active surveillance who underwent radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

A total of 223 patients who fulfilled the criteria for "Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance", were included. Mp-1.5 Tesla MRI examination staging with endorectal coil was performed at least 6-8 weeks after TRUS-guided biopsy. In all patients, the likelihood of the presence of cancer was assigned using PIRADS score between 1 and 5. Outcomes of interest were: Gleason score upgrading, extra capsular extension (ECE), unfavorable prognosis (occurrence of both upgrading and ECE), large tumor volume (≥ 0.5 ml), and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Decision Curve Analyses (DCA) were performed for models with and without inclusion of PIRADS score.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis demonstrated the association of PIRADS score with upgrading (P < 0.0001), ECE (P < 0.0001), unfavorable prognosis (P < 0.0001), and large tumor volume (P = 0.002). ROC curves and DCA showed that models including PIRADS score resulted in greater net benefit for almost all the outcomes of interest, with the only exception of SVI.

CONCLUSIONS

mpMRI and PIRADS scoring are feasible tools in clinical setting and could be used as decision-support systems for a more accurate selection of patients eligible for AS.

The emerging threat of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria in urology

Antibiotic resistance in Gram-negative uropathogens is a major global concern. Worldwide, the prevalence of Enterobacteriaceae that produce extended-spectrum β-lactamase or carbapenemase enzymes continues to increase at alarming rates. Likewise, resistance to other antimicrobial agents including aminoglycosides, sulphonamides and fluoroquinolones is also escalating rapidly. Bacterial resistance has major implications for urological practice, particularly in relation to catheter-associated urinary tract infections (UTIs) and infectious complications following transrectal-ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate or urological surgery. Although some new drugs with activity against Gram-negative bacteria with highly resistant phenotypes will become available in the near future, the existence of a single agent with activity against the great diversity of resistance is unlikely. Responding to the challenges of Gram-negative resistance will require a multifaceted approach including considered use of current antimicrobial agents, improved diagnostics (including the rapid detection of resistance) and surveillance, better adherence to basic measures of infection prevention, development of new antibiotics and research into non-antibiotic treatment and preventive strategies.

Diagnostic performance of expression of PCA3, Hepsin and miR biomarkers inejaculate in combination with serum PSA for the detection of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

Here, we report on the evaluation of the diagnostic performance of ejaculate-derived PCA3, Hepsin, and miRNAs to complement serum PSA to detect prostate cancer. cDNA was prepared from 152 candidate specimens following RNA isolation and amplification for PSA, PCA3 and Hepsin qPCR, with 66 having adequate RNA for all three assays. Small RNA sequencing and examination of PCa-associated miRNAs miR-200b, miR-200c, miR-375 and miR-125b was performed on 20 specimens. We compared findings from prostate biopsies using D'Amico and PRIAS classifications and in relation to whole gland histopathology following radical prostatectomy. Multivariate logistic regression modeling and clinical risk (incorporating standard clinicopathological variables) were performed for all ejaculate-based markers.

RESULTS

While Hepsin alone was not of predictive value, the Hepsin:PCA3 ratio together with serum PSA, expressed as a univariate composite score based on multivariate logistic regression, was shown to be a better predictor than PSA alone of prostate cancer status (AUC 0.724 vs. 0.676) and risk, using D'Amico (AUC 0.701 vs. 0.680) and PRIAS (AUC 0.679 vs. 0.659) risk stratification criteria as classified using prostate biopsies. It was also possible to analyse a subgroup of patients for miRNA expression with miR-200c (AUC 0.788) and miR-375 (AUC 0.758) showing best single marker performance, while a combination of serum PSA, miR-200c, and miR-125b further improved prediction for prostate cancer status when compared to PSA alone determined by biopsy (AUC 0.869 vs. 0.672; P < 0.05), and risk (D'Amico/PRIAS) as well as by radical prostatectomy histology (AUC 0.809 vs. 0.690). For prostate cancer status by biopsy, at a sensitivity of 90%, the specificity of the test increased from 11% for PSA alone to 67% for a combination of PSA, miR-200c, and miR-125b.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that use of a combination of different types of genetic markers in ejaculate together with serum PSA are at least as sensitive as those reported in DRE urine. Furthermore, a combination of serum PSA and selected miRNAs improved prediction of prostate cancer status. This approach may be helpful in triaging patients for MRI and biopsy, when confirmed by larger studies.

The Melbourne Consensus Statement on the early detection of prostate cancer

Various conflicting guidelines and recommendations about prostate cancer screening and early detection have left both clinicians and their patients quite confused. At the Prostate Cancer World Congress held in Melbourne in August 2013, a multidisciplinary group of the world's leading experts in this area gathered together and generated this set of consensus statements to bring some clarity to this confusion. The five consensus statements provide clear guidance for clinicians counselling their patients about the early detection of prostate cancer.

The current status of active surveillance for prostate cancer

The occurrence of low-risk, localized prostate cancer (PCa) has increased in the prostate-specific antigen era. A significant amount of low-risk PCas progress slowly and may not impact patient survival. Thus, these patients may be subjected to unnecessary interventions that result in physical and psychological complications. The active surveillance (AS) protocol has been used over the few past decades. It was designed so that patients with low-risk PCa can be monitored for a period of time, during which they are free from complication of interventions, and can be treated with curative intention on evidence of disease progression. Institutions have developed different selection criteria and follow-up schedules for suitable patients with PCa. Recently, long-term data have emerged suggesting that AS is a reasonable option for appropriately selected patients with low-risk PCa who have a life expectancy of < 10 years. Subsequently, the AS protocol has been recognized by various guidelines as part of the treatment strategy for PCa. However, the challenges that remain for AS are the risk of under-staging of PCa and the low uptake and high attrition rate of AS, and questions remain regarding its long-term efficacy. Recent advances in AS for PCa, such as better imaging modality, combining AS with limited local therapy, as well as the role of AS in association with chemoprevention, are discussed.