Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics in untreated, localized prostate cancer: PSA velocity vs PSA doubling time

Increasing age predicts adverse pathology including intraductal carcinoma of the prostate and cribriform patterns in deferred radical prostatectomy after upfront active surveillance for Gleason grade group 1 prostate cancer: analysis of prospective observational study cohort

BACKGROUND

In men undergoing upfront active surveillance, predictors of adverse pathology in radical prostatectomy specimens, including intraductal carcinoma of the prostate and cribriform patterns, remain unknown. Therefore, we aimed to examine whether adverse pathology in radical prostatectomy specimens could be predicted using preoperative patient characteristics.

METHODS

We re-reviewed available radical prostatectomy specimens from 1035 men prospectively enrolled in the PRIAS-JAPAN cohort between January 2010 and September 2020. We defined adverse pathology on radical prostatectomy specimens as Gleason grade group ≥3, pT stage ≥3, pN positivity or the presence of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate or cribriform patterns. We also examined the predictive factors associated with adverse pathology.

RESULTS

All men analyzed had Gleason grade group 1 specimens at active surveillance enrolment. The incidence of adverse pathologies was 48.9% (with intraductal carcinoma of the prostate or cribriform patterns, 33.6%; without them, 15.3%). The addition of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate or cribriform patterns to the definition of adverse pathology increased the incidence by 10.9%. Patients showing adverse pathology with intraductal carcinoma of the prostate or cribriform patterns had lower biochemical recurrence-free survival (log-rank P = 0.0166). Increasing age at active surveillance enrolment and before radical prostatectomy was the only predictive factor for adverse pathology (odds ratio: 1.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.19, P = 0.0178; odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.22, P = 0.0126).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing age could be a predictive factor for adverse pathology. Our findings suggest that older men could potentially derive advantages from adhering to the examination schedule in active surveillance.

Aggressive Prostate Cancer in Patients Treated with Active Surveillance

Active surveillance has emerged as a promising approach for managing low-risk and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PC), with the aim of minimizing overtreatment and maintaining the quality of life. However, concerns remain about identifying "aggressive prostate cancer" within the active surveillance cohort, which refers to cancers with a higher potential for progression. Previous studies are predictors of aggressive PC during active surveillance. To address this, a personalized risk-based follow-up approach that integrates clinical data, biomarkers, and genetic factors using risk calculators was proposed. This approach enables an efficient risk assessment and the early detection of disease progression, minimizes unnecessary interventions, and improves patient management and outcomes. As active surveillance indications expand, the importance of identifying aggressive PC through a personalized risk-based follow-up is expected to increase.

Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Past, Current, and Future Trends

In response to the rising incidence of indolent, low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) due to increased prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in the 1990s, active surveillance (AS) emerged as a treatment modality to combat overtreatment by delaying or avoiding unnecessary definitive treatment and its associated morbidity. AS consists of regular monitoring of PSA levels, digital rectal exams, medical imaging, and prostate biopsies, so that definitive treatment is only offered when deemed necessary. This paper provides a narrative review of the evolution of AS since its inception and an overview of its current landscape and challenges. Although AS was initially only performed in a study setting, numerous studies have provided evidence for the safety and efficacy of AS which has led guidelines to recommend it as a treatment option for patients with low-risk PCa. For intermediate-risk disease, AS appears to be a viable option for those with favourable clinical characteristics. Over the years, the inclusion criteria, follow-up schedule and triggers for definitive treatment have evolved based on the results of various large AS cohorts. Given the burdensome nature of repeat biopsies, risk-based dynamic monitoring may further reduce overtreatment by avoiding repeat biopsies in selected patients.

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).

Active surveillance in intermediate-risk prostate cancer with PSA 10-20 ng/mL: pathological outcome analysis of a population-level database

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) is generally recognized as the preferred option for men with low-risk prostate cancer. Current guidelines use prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 10-20 ng/mL or low-volume biopsy Gleason grade group (GG) 2 as features that, in part, define the favorable intermediate-risk disease and suggest that AS may be considered for some men in this risk category.

METHODS

We identified 26,548 men initially managed with AS aged <80 years, with clinically localized prostate cancer (cT1-2cN0M0), PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL, biopsy GG ≤ 2 with percent positive cores ≤33% and who converted to treatment with radical prostatectomy from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results prostate with the watchful waiting database. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of adverse pathology at RP according to PSA level (<10 vs 10-20 ng/mL) and GG (1 vs 2).

RESULTS

Of 1731 men with GG 1 disease and PSA 10-20 ng/mL, 382 (22.1%) harbored adverse pathology compared to 2340 (28%) of 8,367 men with GG 2 and a PSA < 10 ng/mL who had adverse pathology at RP. On multivariable analysis, the odds of harboring adverse pathology with a PSA 10-20 ng/mL (odds ratio [OR] 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71-2.05, p < 0.001) was less than that of GG 2 (OR 2.56, 95%CI 2.40-2.73, p < 0.001) after adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support extending AS criteria more permissively to carefully selected men with PSA 10-20 ng/mL and GG 1 disease.

CERC: an interactive content extraction, recognition, and construction tool for clinical and biomedical text

Background

Automated summarization of scientific literature and patient records is essential for enhancing clinical decision-making and facilitating precision medicine. Most existing summarization methods are based on single indicators of relevance, offer limited capabilities for information visualization, and do not account for user specific interests. In this work, we develop an interactive content extraction, recognition, and construction system (CERC) that combines machine learning and visualization techniques with domain knowledge for highlighting and extracting salient information from clinical and biomedical text.

Methods

A novel sentence-ranking framework multi indicator text summarization, MINTS, is developed for extractive summarization. MINTS uses random forests and multiple indicators of importance for relevance evaluation and ranking of sentences. Indicative summarization is performed using weighted term frequency-inverse document frequency scores of over-represented domain-specific terms. A controlled vocabulary dictionary generated using MeSH, SNOMED-CT, and PubTator is used for determining relevant terms. 35 full-text CRAFT articles were used as the training set. The performance of the MINTS algorithm is evaluated on a test set consisting of the remaining 32 full-text CRAFT articles and 30 clinical case reports using the ROUGE toolkit.

Results

The random forests model classified sentences as “good” or “bad” with 87.5% accuracy on the test set. Summarization results from the MINTS algorithm achieved higher ROUGE-1, ROUGE-2, and ROUGE-SU4 scores when compared to methods based on single indicators such as term frequency distribution, position, eigenvector centrality (LexRank), and random selection, p < 0.01. The automatic language translator and the customizable information extraction and pre-processing pipeline for EHR demonstrate that CERC can readily be incorporated within clinical decision support systems to improve quality of care and assist in data-driven and evidence-based informed decision making for direct patient care.

Conclusions

We have developed a web-based summarization and visualization tool, CERC (https://newton.isye.gatech.edu/CERC1/), for extracting salient information from clinical and biomedical text. The system ranks sentences by relevance and includes features that can facilitate early detection of medical risks in a clinical setting. The interactive interface allows users to filter content and edit/save summaries. The evaluation results on two test corpuses show that the newly developed MINTS algorithm outperforms methods based on single characteristics of importance.

A Pilot retrospective analysis of alpha-blockers on recurrence in men with localised prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy

While alpha-blockers are commonly used to reduce lower urinary tract symptoms in prostate cancer patients receiving radiotherapy, their impact on response to radiotherapy remains unknown. Therefore, this pilot study aimed to retrospectively determine if alpha-blockers use, influenced response to radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer. In total, 303 prostate cancer patients were included, consisting of 84 control (alpha-blocker naïve), 72 tamsulosin and 147 prazosin patients. The main outcomes measured were relapse rates (%), time to biochemical relapse (months) and PSA velocity (ng/mL/year). Recurrence free survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Prazosin significantly reduced biochemical relapse at both two and five-years (2.72%, 8.84%) compared to control (22.61%, 34.52%). Recurrence free survival was also significantly higher in the prazosin group. This remained after multivariable analysis (HR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.04-0.26, p < 0.001). Patients receiving prazosin had a 3.9 times lower relative risk of biochemical relapse compared to control. Although not statistically significant, tamsulosin and prazosin extended recurrence free survival by 13.15 and 9.21 months respectively. We show for the first time that prazosin may reduce risk of prostate cancer recurrence and delay time to biochemical relapse and provides justification for prospective studies to examine its potential as an adjunct treatment option for localised prostate cancer.

Prostate-specific antigen velocity in diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer - a systematic review

Prostate-specific antigen velocity (PSAV) is widely used to detect PC and predict its progression. In this study, we qualitatively synthesized the currently available evidence from published studies regarding the PSAV role in PC. Electronic databases were searched to find relevant articles published until January 2019. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to identify related papers. Eventually, data extraction followed by evidence synthesis was conducted. Full-text screening resulted in 42 included studies. Multiple definitions and intervals were used for PSAV calculation across studies. Results from the included studies were conflicting regarding the role of PSAV in detecting PC and predicting progression in active surveillance cases. However, there is evidence that PSAV may have a predictive role in post-treated men. There is no clear-cut evidence from the published literature to support the use of PSAV in clinical practice.

Determining Clinically Based Factors Associated With Reclassification in the Pre-MRI Era using a Large Prospective Active Surveillance Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To report biopsy-related and oncologic outcomes in a large prospective active surveillance cohort that was initiated in the premagnetic resonance imaging era and to additionally identify clinical factors associated with disease reclassification in order to inform future studies designed to improve enrollment and follow-up on active surveillance.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively enrolled at a single institution from 2006 to 2014 and followed until 2016. Men with Gleason 6 or 7 disease were eligible, and those with >6 months follow-up were included in the analysis. Patients were risk stratified based on clinical/pathologic criteria, including based on a combination of baseline and confirmatory biopsy tumor characteristics. Reclassification-free survival, based on tumor volume increase or Gleason score increase, was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Of 825 enrolled patients, 682 met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 40 months (range 6.6-126.8). Disease was reclassified in 249 (36.5%), and 157 (23.0%) underwent treatment. A single positive core with a negative confirmatory biopsy was significantly associated with time to reclassification (median not met vs 43 months, log rank test P <.001). Composite tumor length, defined as the combined tumor length between baseline and confirmatory biopsies, was associated with shorter Gleason upgrade-free survival (hazard ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.40, P <.001) in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Baseline stratification using clinical factors including tumor length may refine risk stratification and offer the foundation on which new systems that incorporate modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging may be based.

Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors delay relapse and reduce Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) velocity in patients treated with radiotherapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer: a pilot study

Introduction

A common treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa) is radiotherapy; however, effectiveness is hampered because of toxicities and tumor resistance. Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been identified as potential agents that could improve treatment outcomes and have demonstrated ability to increase the radiosensitivity of many human carcinomas. This retrospective human study aims to investigate the ability of COX-2 inhibitors, celecoxib, and meloxicam, to improve treatment outcomes after radiotherapy.

Methods

Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) data of eligible patients were obtained from Genesis Cancer Care, Southport, Australia. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients in each group that had reached biochemical relapse at two and five years after treatment. Secondary outcomes included time to biochemical relapse and PSA velocity.

Results

At two and five years after treatment, both the celecoxib (6.7%, 18.3%) and meloxicam (0.0%, 18.9%) showed lower relapse rates than the control (8.6%, 31.0%). Although not statistically significant, these results are clinically significant. In addition, the two treatment groups were found to increase the time to relapse, 46.20 months for celecoxib and 54.15 months for meloxicam, compared with the control group, 35.53 months. A similar trend was shown for PSA velocity with both treatment groups demonstrating lower PSA velocities compared with control.

Conclusions

This study provides further evidence to the potential for COX-2 inhibitors to address gaps in localizedz PCa treatment by demonstrating high clinical significance for the use of celecoxib and meloxicam. Further research should be conducted including larger retrospective studies and prospective studies to fully evaluate the benefits of COX-2 inhibitors in combination with radiotherapy for PCa.

Total energy expenditure and vigorous-intensity physical activity are associated with reduced odds of reclassification among men on active surveillance

BACKGROUND

Research examining the association between physical activity (PA) and prostate cancer (PCa) has accumulated; however, few studies have examined this association in the context of active surveillance. The current study examines this among men initially diagnosed with favorable-risk PCa and managed by active surveillance at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Canada and the Royal Marsden Hospital in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Participants completed a questionnaire on daily participation in non-leisure, transport, and recreational PA. A logistic regression was employed using PA as the independent variable and whether the patient reclassified to higher-risk PCa while on active surveillance as the dependent variable. Demographic and lifestyle covariates were incorporated in the analysis to assess potential confounding and effect modification.

RESULTS

Men from both hospitals presented with similar clinical and demographic characteristics. Total PA was inversely associated with odds of reclassification while on active surveillance (p-trend = 0.027). A weaker inverse association was observed with recreational PA (p-trend = 0.30). Men who participated in weekly vigorous PA were less likely to reclassify than those who did not (odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.42 (0.20-0.85)).

CONCLUSIONS

Total and vigorous PA were inversely associated with odds of reclassification in two active surveillance cohorts. Given the limitations of this study, more robust prospective observational studies involving objective PA measures are warranted to confirm findings.

The role of lifestyle characteristics on prostate cancer progression in two active surveillance cohorts

BACKGROUND

Although much research has examined the relationship between lifestyle and prostate cancer (PCa) risk, few studies focus on the relationship between lifestyle and PCa progression. The present study examines this relationship among men initially diagnosed with low- to intermediate-risk PCa and managed with active surveillance (AS).

METHODS

Men enrolled in two separate AS programs were recruited for this study. Data regarding clinical, demographic and lifestyle characteristics were collected. Results were then compared between men whose disease remained low- to intermediate-risk and men whose disease progressed.

RESULTS

Demographic, clinical and physical characteristics were similar between comparative groups and cohorts, with the exception that age at the time of diagnosis and questionnaire was increased among men whose disease progressed. Lifestyle scores among men who remained low- to intermediate-risk were higher than those whose risk progressed; however, scores were only significant in one cohort on univariable analysis. On multivariable analysis, the only predictor of progression was age at diagnosis. Physical activity was consistently higher in both low risk groups, although this difference was insignificant. Consistent differences in other lifestyle variables were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Age remains an important predictor of PCa progression. Improving lifestyle characteristics among men initially managed with AS might help to reduce the risk of progression. Given the limitations of this study, more rigorous investigation is required to confirm whether lifestyle characteristics influence the progression of low- to intermediate-risk PCa.

Biomarkers in localized prostate cancer

Biomarkers can improve prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment. Accuracy of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for early diagnosis of prostate cancer is not satisfactory, as it is an organ- but not cancer-specific biomarker, and it can be improved by using models that incorporate PSA along with other test results, such as prostate cancer antigen 3, the molecular forms of PSA (proPSA, benign PSA and intact PSA), as well as kallikreins. Recent reports suggest that new tools may be provided by metabolomic studies as shown by preliminary data on sarcosine. Additional molecular biomarkers have been identified by the use of genomics, proteomics and metabolomics. We review the most relevant biomarkers for early diagnosis and management of localized prostate cancer.

[Active surveillance of low risk prostate cancer]

In Europe prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers among men. The diagnostics always include a control of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and examination of a representative tissue sample from the prostate. With these findings it is possible to evaluate the degree of progression of the cancer and its prognosis. Several treatment options for localized prostate cancer are given by national and international guidelines including radical prostatectomy, percutaneous radiation therapy, or brachytherapy and surveillance of the cancer with optional treatment at a later stage. For the latter treatment option, known as active surveillance, strict criteria have to be met. The advantage of active surveillance is that only patients with progressive cancer are subjected to radical therapy. Patients with very slow or non-progressing cancer do not have to undergo therapy and thus do not have to suffer from the side effects. The basic idea behind active surveillance is that some cancers will not progress to a stage that requires treatment within the lifetime of the patient and therefore do not require treatment at all. Unfortunately the criteria for active surveillance are not definitive enough at the current time leading only to a delay in effective treatment for many patients. The surveillance strategy has without doubt a high significance among the treatment options for prostate cancer; however, at the current time it lacks reliable indicators for a certain prognosis. Therefore, patients must be informed in detail about the advantages and disadvantages of active surveillance.

Active surveillance for the management of localized prostate cancer: Guideline recommendations

INTRODUCTION

The objective is to provide guidance on the role of active surveillance (AS) as a management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer patients and to ensure that AS is offered to appropriate patients assessed by a standardized protocol. Prostate cancer is often a slowly progressive or sometimes non-progressive indolent disease diagnosed at an early stage with localized tumours that are unlikely to cause morbidity or death. Standard active treatments for prostate cancer include radiotherapy (RT) or radical prostatectomy (RP), but the harms from over diagnosis and overtreatment are of a significant concern. AS is increasingly being considered as a management strategy to avoid or delay the potential harms caused by unnecessary radical treatment.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, guideline databases and relevant meeting proceedings was performed and a systematic review of identified evidence was synthesized to make recommendations relating to the role of AS in the management of localized prostate cancer.

RESULTS

No exiting guidelines or reviews were suitable for use in the synthesis of evidence for the recommendations, but 59 reports of primary studies were identified. Due to studies being either non-comparative or heterogeneous, pooled meta-analyses were not conducted.

CONCLUSION

The working group concluded that for patients with low-risk (Gleason score ≤6) localized prostate cancer, AS is the preferred disease management strategy. Active treatment (RP or RT) is appropriate for patients with intermediate-risk (Gleason score 7) localized prostate cancer. For select patients with low-volume Gleason 3+4=7 localized prostate cancer, AS can be considered.

Predictive role of free prostate-specific antigen in a prospective active surveillance program (PRIAS)

PURPOSE

To evaluate the utility of percentage of free serum PSA (%fPSA) as a predictor of adverse rebiopsy findings, treatment change and radical prostatectomy (RP) findings in a prospective active surveillance (AS) trial.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the global PRIAS study with baseline %fPSA available were included. Putative baseline predictors (e.g. PSA, %fPSA) of adverse rebiopsy findings were explored using logistic regression analysis. Association of variables with treatment change and RP findings over time were evaluated with Cox regression analysis. Active treatment-free survival was assessed with a Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Of 3701 patients recruited to PRIAS, 939 had %fPSA measured at study entry. Four hundred and thirty-eight of them had %fPSA available after 1 year. Median follow-up was 17.2 months. First rebiopsy results were available for 595 patients and of those, 144 (24.2 %) had adverse findings. A total of 283 (30.1 %) patients discontinued surveillance, of those 181 (64.0 %) due to protocol-based reasons. Although median %fPSA values were significantly lower in patients who changed treatment, according to the multivariate regression analysis, initial %fPSA value was not predictive for treatment change or adverse rebiopsy findings. However, the probability of discontinuing AS was significantly lower in patients with "favourable" initial %fPSA characteristics and %fPSA during follow-up (initial %fPSA ≥15 and positive %fPSA velocity) compared to those with "adverse" %fPSA characteristics (initial %fPSA <15 and negative %fPSA velocity).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic %fPSA provides no additional prognostic value when compared to other predictors already in use in AS protocols. However, %fPSA velocity during surveillance may aid in predicting the probability for future treatment change.

Circulating biomarkers for discriminating indolent from aggressive disease in prostate cancer active surveillance

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review research on the use of circulating biomarkers to predict unfavorable tumor pathology in the setting of active surveillance, or in clinical contexts that are informative for active surveillance, such as men with low-risk prostate cancer evaluated for upgrading or upstaging at surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Biomarkers have been evaluated in serum, plasma, urine, and expressed prostatic secretions. Only a small number of biomarkers have been evaluated in multiple studies: %free prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA velocity, PSA doubling time, proPSA, PCA3, TMPRSS2-ERG. Single studies with relevance to active surveillance have evaluated microRNAs, circulating tumor cells, and exosomes. The most consistent significant associations with unfavorable tumor pathology have been with %free PSA. Associations with [-2]proPSA and Prostate Health Index have also been consistent; however, three of four studies come from the same active surveillance patient cohort.

SUMMARY

Circulating biomarkers represent a promising approach to identify men with apparently low-risk biopsy pathology, but who harbor potentially aggressive tumors unsuitable for active surveillance. Research is still at an early stage; existing biomarkers need rigorous validation with consistent methodology, and additional biomarkers need to be evaluated. Successful clinical translation would reduce the frequency of surveillance biopsies, and may enhance acceptance of active surveillance.

Active surveillance in patients with a PSA >10 ng/mL

INTRODUCTION

The use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer is controversial. Some consider it an unreliable marker and others as sufficient evidence to exclude patients from AS. We analyzed our cohort of AS patients with a PSA over 10 ng/mL.

METHODS

We included patients who had clinical T1c-T2a Gleason ≤6 disease, and ≤3 positive cores with ≤50% core involvement at diagnostic biopsy and ≥2 total biopsies. Patients were divided into 3 groups: (1) those with baseline PSA >10 ng/mL, (2) those with a PSA rise >10 ng/mL during follow-up; and (3) those with a PSA <10 ng/mL throughout AS. Adverse histology was defined as biopsy parameters exceeding the entry criteria limits. We further compared this cohort to a concurrent institutional cohort with equal biopsy parameters treated with immediate radical prostatectomy.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 698 patients with a median follow-up of 46.2 months. In total, 82 patients had a baseline PSA >10 ng/mL and 157 had a PSA rise >10 ng/mL during surveillance. No difference in adverse histology incidence was detected between groups (p = 0.3). Patients with a PSA greater than 10 were older and had higher prostate volumes. Hazard ratios for groups with a PSA >10 were protective against adverse histology. Larger prostate volume and minimal core involvement appear as factors related to this successful selection of patients to be treated with AS.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that a strict cut-off PSA value for all AS patients is unwarranted and may result in overtreatment. Though lacking long-term data and validation, AS appears safe in select patients with a PSA >10 ng/mL and low volume Gleason 6 disease.

Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinicopathologic variables and biomarkers for risk stratification

CONTEXT

Active surveillance (AS) is an important strategy to reduce prostate cancer overtreatment. However, the optimal criteria for eligibility and predictors of progression while on AS are debated.

OBJECTIVE

To review primary data on markers, genetic factors, and risk stratification for patient selection and predictors of progression during AS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception to April 2014 for original articles on biomarkers and risk stratification for AS.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Patient factors associated with AS outcomes in some studies include age, race, and family history. Multiple studies provide consistent evidence that a lower percentage of free prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a higher Prostate Health Index (PHI), a higher PSA density (PSAD), and greater biopsy core involvement at baseline predict a greater risk of progression. During follow-up, serial measurements of PHI and PSAD, as well as repeat biopsy results, predict later biopsy progression. While some studies have suggested a univariate relationship between urinary prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and transmembrane protease, serine 2-v-ets avian erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog gene fusion (TMPRSS2:ERG) with adverse biopsy features, these markers have not been consistently shown to independently predict AS outcomes. No conclusive data support the use of genetic tests in AS. Limitations of these studies include heterogeneous definitions of progression and limited follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing body of literature on patient characteristics, biopsy features, and biomarkers with potential utility in AS. More data are needed on practical applications such as combining these tests into multivariable clinical algorithms and long-term outcomes to further improve AS in the future.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Several PSA-based tests (free PSA, PHI, PSAD) and the extent of cancer on biopsy can help to stratify the risk of progression during active surveillance. Investigation of several other markers is under way.

Implementation of PSA-based active surveillance in prostate cancer

Prostate cancer screening had led to the diagnosis of a large proportion of localized and low-risk disease. Many of these cancer cases are believed to be indolent and would not be clinically perceived in the absence of screening. In addition to that, the wide use of active treatment has exposed these patients to treatment-related quality-of-life impact. In this setting active surveillance as a way of deferring active treatment and reserving such treatment to cases of disease progression only has gained interest. PSA has been widely used to identify patients eligible for active surveillance and also for disease monitoring. The goal of this review was to describe the place of PSA in the monitoring of patients under active surveillance based on the existing studies and to discuss the importance of PSA in light of other existing or emerging tools to monitor prostate cancer in active surveillance.

Transperineal ultrasound-guided 12-core prostate biopsy: an extended approach to diagnose transition zone prostate tumors

Objective

Transperineal ultrasound-guided (TPUS) 12-core prostate biopsy was evaluated as an initial strategy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer, The distribution of prostate cancer lesions was assessed with zone-specific biopsy.

Methods

From January 2010 to December 2012, 287 patients underwent TPUS-guided 12-core prostate biopsy. Multiple cores were obtained from both the peripheral zone (PZ) and the transition zone (TZ) of the prostate. Participants' clinical data and the diagnostic yield of the cores were recorded and prospectively analyzed as a cross-sectional study.

Results

The diagnostic yield of the 12-core prostate biopsy was significantly higher compared to the 6-core scheme (42.16 vs. 21.6%). The diagnostic yield of the 10-core prostate biopsy was significantly higher compared to the 6-core scheme (37.6 vs. 21.6%). The 12-core scheme improved the diagnostic yield in prostates >50 ml (12-core scheme: 28.1% vs. 10-core scheme: 20.4%; p = 0.034).

Conclusions

The 12-core biopsy scheme is a safe and effective approach for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. TZ biopsies in patients with larger prostates should be included in the initial biopsy strategy.

Imaging and Markers as Novel Diagnostic Tools in Detecting Insignificant Prostate Cancer: A Critical Overview

Recent therapeutic advances for managing low-risk prostate cancer include the active surveillance and focal treatment. However, locating a tumor and detecting its volume by adequate sampling is still problematic. Development of predictive biomarkers guiding individual therapeutic choices remains an ongoing challenge. At the same time, prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging is gaining increasing importance for prostate diagnostics. The high morphological resolution of T2-weighted imaging and functional MRI methods may increase the specificity and sensitivity of diagnostics. Also, recent studies founded an ability of novel biomarkers to identify clinically insignificant prostate cancer, risk of progression, and association with poor differentiation and, therefore, with clinical significance. Probably, the above mentioned methods would improve tumor characterization in terms of its volume, aggressiveness, and focality. In this review, we attempted to evaluate the applications of novel imaging techniques and biomarkers in assessing the significance of the prostate cancer.

Clinical implications of family history of prostate cancer and genetic risk single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) profiles in an active surveillance cohort

OBJECTIVES

To explore the potential prognostic role of family history (FH) of prostate cancer and prostate cancer risk single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in patients undergoing active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. This is the first study to date, which has investigated the potential prognostic role of SNP profiles in an AS cohort

PATIENTS AND METHODS

FH data were collected from patients in the Royal Marsden Hospital AS study. In all, 39 prostate cancer-risk SNPs identified from published genome wide association studies (GWAS) were genotyped using the Sequenom Platform and TaqMan™ assays from available DNA. The cumulative genetic-risk scores for each patient were then calculated using the weighted effect estimated from previous GWAS (log-additive model). FH status and the genetic-risk scores were assessed against adverse outcomes in AS, time to treatment and adverse histology on repeat biopsy, using univariable and multivariable Cox regression models to address time to treatment; and binary logistic regression to address biopsy upgrade.

RESULTS

Of 471 patients, 55 (13.6%) had adverse histology on repeat biopsies and 145 (30.8%) had deferred treatment. On univariate analysis, there was no significant relationship between FH of prostate cancer in any degree of relation, and adverse histology or time to treatment. For risk score analyses, 386 patients' DNA was studied; and there was also no relationship found between the calculated genetic risk scores and adverse histology or time to treatment (P = 0.573 and P = 0.965, respectively). The retrospective study design and the few events were the main limitation of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient data to support the use of FH status or prostate cancer SNP profile risk scores as prognostic factors in AS and these should not be used to influence management decisions. As more genetic variants are discovered this may change and should be reassessed in multicentre AS cohorts.

How to select the optimal therapy for early-stage prostate cancer

Selecting the "optimal therapy" for the patient with localized prostate cancer may be one of the most challenging medical decisions facing the oncologist. Most patients will have a number of appropriate therapeutic options available to them. Before determining which therapy is most appropriate for a patient, a critical question which needs to be asked is whether any therapy is necessary, especially for those who present with early-stage, low-grade, low-volume disease. Furthermore, given the lack of randomized trials available to guide physicians regarding the superiority of one therapy over another, it is important to consider the different side-effect profiles relevant for each treatment modality. The potential toxicities of therapy impact quality-of-life outcomes and play an important role for most patients in their individual selection of a particular therapy. In addition, there are other important issues that need to be considered, which include the medical condition of the patient and emotional and psychological considerations, as well as family/peer viewpoints or perceived notions of a particular therapy. This review will discuss the relevant issues in the decision making and treatment selection for the patient.

Active surveillance in prostate cancer: patient selection and triggers for intervention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The long-term safety and effectiveness of active surveillance depends on our ability to select appropriate patients and trigger delayed treatment in those who need it, whereas avoiding intervention in those who do not. In this review, we will consider how recent advances have influenced patient selection for active surveillance and review the range of different intervention triggers that have been proposed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several large surveillance cohort studies have been reported recently showing excellent medium-term outcomes in well selected patients, with approximately a third of patients going on to have deferred treatment. Debate continues on the most appropriate eligibility criteria for active surveillance and what triggers for intervention should be used. There is growing interest in the role of transperineal template biopsies and multiparametric MRI, both for patient selection and in identifying triggers for intervention.

SUMMARY

Active surveillance is a well tolerated treatment option in well selected groups of patients. There is no 'one size fits all' set of criteria for patient selection or triggers for intervention but decisions can be guided by information from histology, prostate-specific antigen kinetics and imaging.

Comprehensive analysis of post-diagnostic prostate-specific antigen kinetics as predictor of a prostate cancer progression in active surveillance patients

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: A significant proportion of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer do not require immediate treatment and could be managed by active surveillance, which usually includes serial measurements of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and regular biopsies. The rate of rise in PSA levels, which could be calculated as PSA velocity or PSA doubling time, was previously suggested to be associated with the biological aggressiveness of prostate cancer. Although these parameters are obvious candidates for predicting tumour progression in active surveillance patients, earlier studies that examined this topic provided conflicting results. Our analysis showed that PSA velocity and PSA doubling time calculated at different time-points, by different methods, over different intervals, and in different sub-groups of active surveillance patients provide little if any prognostic information. Although we found some significant associations between PSA velocity and the risk of progression as determined by biopsy, the actual clinical significance of this association was small. Furthermore, PSA velocity did not add to the predictive accuracy of total PSA.

OBJECTIVE

To study whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity (PSAV) and PSA doubling time (PSADT) are associated with biopsy progression in patients managed by active surveillance.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our inclusion criteria for active surveillance are biopsy Gleason sum <7, two or fewer positive biopsy cores, ≤20% tumour present in any core, and clinical stage T1-T2a. Changes in any of these parameters during the follow-up that went beyond these limits are considered to be progression. This study included 250 patients who had at least one surveillance biopsy, an available PSA measured no earlier than 3 months before diagnosis, and at least one PSA measurement before each surveillance biopsy. We evaluated the association between PSA kinetics and progression at successive surveillance biopsies in different sub-groups of patients by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) as well as sensitivity and specificity of different thresholds.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 3.0 years, the disease of 64 (26%) patients progressed. PSADT was not associated with biopsy progression, whereas PSAV was only weakly associated with progression in certain sub-groups. However, incorporation of PSAV in models including total PSA resulted in a moderate increase in AUC only when the entire cohort was analysed. In other sub-groups the predictive accuracy of total PSA was not significantly improved by adding PSAV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm that PSA kinetics should not be used in decision-making in patients with low-risk prostate cancer managed by active surveillance. Regular surveillance biopsies should remain as the principal method of monitoring cancer progression in these men.

Differentiation of lethal and non lethal prostate cancer: PSA and PSA isoforms and kinetics

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer has led to a decrease in cancer mortality. However, the high prevalence of low-grade prostate cancer and its long natural history, competing causes of death in older men and treatment patterns of prostate cancer, have led to dramatic overtreatment of the disease. Improved markers of prostate cancer lethality are needed to reduce the overtreatment of prostate cancer that leads to a reduced quality of life without extending life for a high proportion of men. The PSA level prior to treatment is routinely used in multivariable models to predict prostate cancer aggressiveness. PSA isoforms and PSA kinetics have been associated with more aggressive phenotypes, but are not routinely employed as part of prediction tools prior to treatment. PSA kinetics is a valuable marker of lethality post treatment and routinely used in determining the need for salvage therapy.

The relationship between prostate specific antigen change and biopsy progression in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We assessed whether an association exists between a change in prostate specific antigen and biopsy progression in men on active surveillance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of patients undergoing active surveillance for prostate cancer was identified from the urological oncology database at our institution. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine whether prostate specific antigen velocity, defined as the change in ln(prostate specific antigen) per year, is associated with biopsy progression, defined as a Gleason upgrade or volume progression on repeat biopsy within 24 months of diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 241 men with a mean ± SD age of 61 ± 7 years and mean prostate specific antigen 4.9 ± 2.2 ng/ml met study inclusion criteria. Median time to repeat biopsy was 10 months (IQR 6-13). Biopsy progression developed in 55 men (23%), including a Gleason score upgrade in 46 (19%), greater than 33% positive cores in 11 (5%) and greater than 50% maximum single core positive in 12 (5%). The median prostate specific antigen ratio per year was 1.0 (IQR 0.95-1.03), although 1 man had a ratio of greater than 1.26 (doubled over 3 years) and 7 had a ratio of less than 1/1.26 (halved over 3 years). On multivariate analysis prostate specific antigen doubling within 3 years was associated with a 1.4-fold increase in the odds of biopsy progression (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.6-3.4, p = 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

There is little change in prostate specific antigen during the first 24 months of surveillance in men with well staged, low risk prostate cancer. We believe that these findings highlight the importance of repeat biopsy during surveillance.

Relationship between initial PSA density with future PSA kinetics and repeat biopsies in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance

The objective of our study is to examine the correlation between PSA density (PSAd) at the time of diagnosis with PSA velocity (PSAV), PSA doubling time and tumour progression, on repeat biopsy, in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Data from 102 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer on active surveillance in the period between 1992 and 2007, who had the necessary parameters available, were collected. PSAd was calculated and correlated with PSAV, PSA doubling time (PSADT), Gleason score at diagnosis and local progression on repeated biopsies. PSAV was 0.64 and 1.31 ng ml^–1 per year (P=0.02), PSADT of 192 and 113 months (P=0.4) for PSAd below and above 0.15, respectively. The rate of detecting high Gleason score (⩾7) at diagnosis was 6 and 23% for PSAd below and above 0.15, respectively. A total of 101 patients underwent at least a second biopsy and the incidence of upgrading was 10 and 31% for PSAd below and above 0.15, respectively (P=0.001). Although low PSAd is an accepted measure for suggesting insignificant prostate cancer, our study expands its role to indicate that PSAd <0.15 may be an additional clinical parameter that may suggest indolent disease, as measured by future PSAV and repeat biopsy over time.

Prostate-Specific Antigen Kinetics During Follow-Up Are an Unreliable Trigger for Intervention in a Prostate Cancer Surveillance Program

Purpose

To assess the predictive ability of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity (PSAV) and doubling time (PSADT) for biopsy progression and adverse pathology at prostatectomy among men with low-risk prostate cancer enrolled on an active-surveillance program.

Methods

We evaluated 290 men who met criteria for active surveillance (ie, PSA density < 0.15 ng/mL/cm3 and Gleason score ≤ 6 with no pattern ≥ 4, involving ≤ 2 cores with cancer, and ≤ 50% involvement of any core by cancer) with two or more serial PSA measurements after diagnosis from 1994 to 2008. Follow-up included twice-yearly digital rectal exam and PSA measurements and yearly surveillance biopsy. Treatment was recommended for biopsy progression (ie, Gleason score ≥ 7, or > 2 positive cores, or > 50% core involvement). Sensitivity and specificity of postdiagnostic PSAV and PSADT were explored by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

Results

Overall, 188 (65%) men remained on active surveillance, and 102 (35%) developed biopsy progression at a median follow-up of 2.9 years. PSADT was not significantly associated with subsequent adverse biopsy findings (P = .83), and PSAV was marginally significant (P = .06). No PSAV or PSADT cut point had both high sensitivity and specificity (area under the curve, 0.61 and 0.59, respectively) for biopsy progression. In those who eventually underwent radical prostatectomy, PSAV (P = .79) and PSADT (P = .87) were not associated with the presence of unfavorable surgical pathology.

Conclusion

Postdiagnostic PSA kinetics do not reliably predict adverse pathology and should not be used to replace annual surveillance biopsy for monitoring men on active surveillance.