Prediction of Prostate Cancer for Patients Receiving Finasteride: Results From the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

Family history, obesity, urological factors and diabetic medications and their associations with risk of prostate cancer diagnosis in a large prospective study

Background

Prostate cancer (PC) aetiology is unclear. PC risk was examined in relation to several factors in a large population-based prospective study.

Methods

Male participants were from Sax Institute’s 45 and Up Study (Australia) recruited between 2006 and 2009. Questionnaire and linked administrative health data from the Centre for Health Record Linkage and Services Australia were used to identify incident PC, healthcare utilisations, Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing reimbursements and dispensing of metformin and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) prescriptions. Multivariable Cox and Joint Cox regression analyses were used to examine associations by cancer spread, adjusting for various confounders.

Results

Of 107,706 eligible men, 4257 developed incident PC up to end 2013. Risk of PC diagnosis increased with: PC family history (versus no family history of cancer; HR_adjusted = 1.36; 95% CI:1.21–1.52); father and brother(s) diagnosed with PC (versus cancer-free family history; HR_adjusted = 2.20; 95% CI:1.61–2.99); severe lower-urinary-tract symptoms (versus mild; HR_adjusted = 1.77; 95% CI:1.53–2.04) and vasectomy (versus none; HR_adjusted = 1.08; 95% CI:1.00–1.16). PC risk decreased with dispensed prescriptions (versus none) for BPH (HR_adjusted = 0.76; 95% CI:0.69–0.85) and metformin (HR_adjusted = 0.57; 95% CI:0.48–0.68). Advanced PC risk increased with vasectomy (HR_adjusted = 1.28; 95% CI:1.06–1.55) and being obese (versus normal weight; HR_adjusted = 1.31; 95% CI:1.01–1.69).

Conclusion

Vasectomy and obesity are associated with an increased risk of advanced PC. The reduced risk of localised and advanced PC associated with BPH, and diabetes prescriptions warrants investigation.

Prostate-specific antigen density during dutasteride treatment for 1 year predicts the presence of prostate cancer in benign prostatic hyperplasia after the first negative biopsy (PREDICT study)

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively evaluate the detection rate of prostate cancer, and to identify the risk factors of prostate cancer detection after a 1-year administration of dutasteride and first negative prostate biopsy.

METHODS

Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia who presented high prostate-specific antigen levels after the first negative prostate biopsy were administered 0.5 mg dutasteride daily for 1 year. They underwent a repeat prostate biopsy after 1 year. The primary end-point was the detection rate of prostate cancer. The secondary end-point was the ability of prostate-specific antigen kinetics to predict prostate cancer detection. Prostate-specific antigen was measured before the initial prostate biopsy and at 6, 9 and 12 months after starting dutasteride. Patients were classified into a prostate cancer and a non-prostate cancer group.

RESULTS

Prostate cancer was detected in 15 of 149 participants (10.1%). The total prostate-specific antigen change between the prostate cancer and non-prostate cancer group at 1 year was significantly different (P = 0.002). Although prostate-specific antigen levels at baseline did not significantly differ between study groups (P = 0.102), prostate-specific antigen levels at 6, 9 and 12 months were significantly different (P = 0.002, P = 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The mean reduction rate of prostate-specific antigen density between the prostate cancer and non-prostate cancer group at 1 year was significantly different (-4.25 ± 76.5% vs -38.0 ± 28.7%, P = 0.001). Using a multivariate analysis, a >10% increase of prostate-specific antigen density at 1 year post-dutasteride treatment was the only predictive risk factor for prostate cancer after the first negative prostate biopsy (odds ratio 11.238, 95% confidence interval 3.112-40.577, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In the present study cohort, >10% increase in prostate-specific antigen density represented the only significant predictive risk factor for prostate cancer diagnosis in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen after the first negative prostate biopsy.

Medical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Where do we stand?

Male lower urinary tract symptoms are frequently due to benign prostatic enlargement. Medical therapy is strongly recommended in patients with moderate to severe symptoms. Lower urinary tract symptoms may require a different medical approach using drugs with different mechanisms of action. Alpha-1 blockers, muscarinic receptor antagonists and phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors are the most frequently used drugs. 5-Alpha reductase inhibitors are commonly prescribed to reduce prostate volume and to prevent benign prostatic hyperplasia progression. Currently, medical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement can be tailored according to different symptom characteristics and severity, and to different patient comorbidities and preferences. For this reason, the decision-making process should be based on an accurate patient counselling with detailed clarification of potential benefits and, above all, potential side effects of different drugs. This non-systematic review of the literature presents an update of the current options for medical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement, helping urologists in the decision-making and counselling process.

Chemoprevention in Prostate Cancer: Current Perspective and Future Directions

Chemoprevention of prostate cancer aims to reduce the mortality as well as the public burden of overdetection, which increases anxiety, cost, and morbidity related to the disease. The role of 5-α-reductase inhibitors has been well investigated and shown to decrease the risk of prostate cancer. No current evidence exists to encourage the use of nutrients or vitamins as chemopreventive agents. The modulation of inflammation is one of the most promising targets for chemoprevention of prostate cancer.

Aldo-Keto Reductase (AKR) 1C3 inhibitors: a patent review

INTRODUCTION

AKR1C3 is a drug target in hormonal and hormonal independent malignancies and acts as a major peripheral 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase to yield the potent androgens testosterone and dihydrotestosterone, and as a prostaglandin (PG) F synthase to produce proliferative ligands for the PG FP receptor. AKR1C3 inhibitors may have distinct advantages over existing therapeutics for the treatment of castration resistant prostate cancer, breast cancer and acute myeloid leukemia. Area covered: This article reviews the patent literature on AKR1C3 inhibitors using SciFinder which identified inhibitors in the following chemical classes: N-phenylsulfonyl-indoles, N-(benzimidazoylylcarbonyl)- N-(indoylylcarbonyl)- and N-(pyridinepyrrolyl)- piperidines, N-benzimidazoles and N-benzindoles, repurposed nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (indole acetic acids, N-phenylanthranilates and aryl propionic acids), isoquinolines, and nitrogen and sulfur substituted estrenes. The article evaluates inhibitor AKR potency, specificity, efficacy in cell-based and xenograft models and clinical utility. The advantage of bifunctional compounds that either competitively inhibit AKR1C3 and block its androgen receptor (AR) coactivator function or act as AKR1C3 inhibitors and direct acting AR antagonists are discussed. Expert opinion: A large number of potent and selective inhibitors of AKR1C3 have been described however, preclinical optimization, is required before their benefit in human disease can be assessed.

Pre-radiotherapy PSA progression is a negative prognostic factor in prostate cancer patients using 5‑alpha-reductase inhibitors

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of 5‑alpha-reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) use on radiotherapy outcomes for localized prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 203 patients on a 5-ARI from our institutional database comprising over 2500 patients who had been treated with either external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Patients received a 5-ARI for urinary symptoms or active surveillance. Cancer progressions at the time of definitive treatment were analyzed according to the following criteria: (a) progression of Gleason score or increase in cancer volume on biopsy, (b) first biopsy positive for cancer after being treated for urinary symptoms with a 5-ARI, and (c) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression with or without a previous cancer diagnosis. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined by the Phoenix definition. Log-rank test was used for survival analysis.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 38.2 months (standard deviation 22.2 months), 10 (4.9%) patients experienced BF. Concerning prostate cancer progression criteria, 52% of men demonstrated none, 37% showed only one criterion, and 11% showed two. Using univariate analysis, PSA progression (p = 0.004) and appearance of a positive biopsy (p < 0.001) were significant predictive factors for BF, while Gleason progression (p = 0.3) was not. In multivariate analysis adjusted for cancer aggressiveness, rising PSA (hazard ratio, HR, 5.7; 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.1-28.8; p = 0.04) and the number of cancer progression factors (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.2-7.0, p = 0.02) remained adverse risk factors.

CONCLUSION

PSA progression experienced during 5‑ARI treatment before radiotherapy is predictive of worse biochemical outcome. Such details should be considered when counseling men prior to radiation therapy.

Biomarkers for prostate cancer: present challenges and future opportunities

Prostate cancer (PCa) has variable biological potential with multiple treatment options. A more personalized approach, therefore, is needed to better define men at higher risk of developing PCa, discriminate indolent from aggressive disease and improve risk stratification after treatment by predicting the likelihood of progression. This may improve clinical decision-making regarding management, improve selection for active surveillance protocols and minimize morbidity from treatment. Discovery of new biomarkers associated with prostate carcinogenesis present an opportunity to provide patients with novel genetic signatures to better understand their risk of developing PCa and help forecast their clinical course. In this review, we examine the current literature evaluating biomarkers in PCa. We also address current limitations and present several ideas for future studies.

5ARI and PSA: open questions

No consensus has ever been reached on the predictive value of serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Limitations of PSA testing in clinical practice have been often discussed in the peer-reviewed literature following data derived from clinical trials such as the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) and the Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) study that showed a linear rise in the risk of prostate cancer with increasing PSA levels. Benign prostatic hyperplasia is a known confounding factor for the use of PSA as a marker of prostate cancer. Increased prostate volume observed with ageing, urinary retention, acute and chronic inflammatory conditions of the prostate, sexual activity and digital rectal examination may all cause an increase of PSA values. Both finasteride and dutasteride, 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5ARI) used in the treatment of BPH, are known to induce a significant decrease of serum PSA levels close to 50%. The observed change in PSA values following 5ARI treatment has raised questions about the accuracy of PSA testing for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients on finasteride/dutasteride treatment. Careful analysis of data from various clinical trials on pharmacological treatment of LUTS due to BPH suggested that the accuracy of PSA testing is not just maintained but rather increased following 5ARI use. Then, the question of PSA accuracy during 5ARI treatment can be considered closed.

Nano-Based PSA Biosensors: An Early Detection Technique of Prostate Cancer

Prostate-specific antigen or PSA is a protein biomarker which is produced by the cells of prostate gland. The normal level of PSA in blood is often elevated in men with prostate cancer. In India, prostate cancer is one among the five, mostly cited cancer in men and it is getting increased by 1% every year. The screening test used for prostate cancer is the Prostate Specific Antigen test. The first PSA assay was determined in 1979. Most of the current techniques used for PSA detection are utilizing large analyzers, there by increased time and cost. Increased PSA levels can also because of prostatitis (inflammation of the prostate gland) or due to many other reasons. A proper technique to differential diagnose this disease is also an issue. The benchmark for the PSA level cannot be determined accurately. For this, various types of biosensors are used. This review journal is is trying to analyze variouus Nano-Biosensors used for early detection of PSA from blood in an early stage itself.

Peripheral zone prostate-specific antigen density: an effective parameter for prostate cancer prediction in men receiving 5α-reductase inhibitors

Purpose:

To evaluate the predictive performance of various parameters derived from volume-adjusted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values in detecting prostate cancer (PCa) and high-grade (Gleason score≥7) PCa according to treatment with a 5α-reductase inhibitor (5ARI).

Methods:

The results of 3,520 prostate biopsies performed between May 2006 and January 2013 were retrospectively assessed. With adjustment for age, 291 patients who had received 5ARI treatment for more than 6 months were identified and matched 1:3 to patients naïve to 5ARIs, resulting in a total of 873 patients. Peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) volumes were determined by transrectal ultrasonography. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to compare predictive performances of PSA, PSA density (PSAD; PSA/prostate volume), PZPSAD (PSA/PZ volume), and TZPSAD (PSA/TZ volume) for detecting PCa and high-grade PCa for each group.

Results:

The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was higher for PSAD than for PSA in the 5ARI group (0.751 vs. 0.677) and in the 5ARI-naïve group (0.649 vs. 0.582), respectively (P<0.001). In the 5ARI group, the AUC for PZPSAD was even higher than that for PSAD (0.781 vs. 0.751, P=0.038); in the 5ARI-naïve group, however, PZPSAD failed to achieve significant superiority (0.652 vs. 0.649, P=0.321). All volume-adjusted PSA indexes showed higher predictive accuracies for detecting PCa than did PSA in both groups. For detecting high-grade cancer, PZPSAD also revealed the highest predictive value in the 5ARI group, whereas PSA revealed the highest predictive value in the 5ARI-naïve group.

Conclusions:

The diagnostic performance of PSAD in the detection of PCa is superior to that of PSA. For patients receiving 5ARI for more than 6 months, PZPSAD confers additional benefits for detecting both PCa and high-grade PCa.

Predicting risk of prostate cancer in men receiving finasteride: effect of prostate volume, number of biopsy cores, and American Urological Association symptom score

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of prostate volume, number of biopsy cores, and American Urological Association symptom score (AUASS) for prostate cancer risk assessment among men receiving finasteride in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

METHODS

Data from 4509 men on the finasteride arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial who were on treatment at the time of their AUASS and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement before biopsy were included in multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Six hundred eighty-two (15.1%) participants had prostate cancer; 257 (37.7%) of these had high-grade disease. For prostate cancer risk, the model included PSA (odds ratio corresponding to a 2-fold increase in PSA: 2.70; P <.0001), digital rectal examination (2.53; P <.0001), age (1.03; P = .001), and prostate volume (odds ratio 0.54 for a 2-fold increase in volume; P <.0001). For high-grade disease, PSA (3.39; P <.0001), digital rectal examination (2.75; P <.0001), age (1.05; P = .001), and volume (0.55; P <.0001) were statistically significant. AUASS was not statistically significant in any of the models that included prostate volume, but was in models in which volume was not included. The number of biopsy cores did not significantly improve risk assessment in any of the models considered.

CONCLUSION

Although in the general population, obtaining a cancer diagnosis is improved by assessing prostate volume and increasing the number of biopsy cores, neither steps are required in men receiving finasteride. Obtaining fewer biopsy cores in men receiving finasteride preserves biopsy sensitivity and will likely reduce cost and morbidity.

Polymorphisms in CYP17 and CYP3A4 and prostate cancer in men of African descent

BACKGROUND

A meta and pooled analysis of published and unpublished case-control studies was performed to evaluate the association of CYP17 (rs743572) and CYP3A4 (rs2740574) polymorphisms and prostate cancer (PCa) in men from the USA, Caribbean, and Africa.

METHODS

Eight publications (seven studies) and two unpublished studies for CYP17 included 1,580 subjects (559 cases and 1,021 controls) and eleven publications and three unpublished studies for CYP3A4 included 3,400 subjects (1,429 cases and 1,971 controls).

RESULTS

Overall, the CYP17 heterozygous and homozygous variants were not associated with PCa, but they confer a 60% increased risk of PCa in a sub-group analysis restricted to African-American men (T/C + C/C, OR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.4). No associations were observed for CYP3A4, overall and in stratified analyses for African-Americans and Africans. The pooled analysis suggests that after adjusting for study, age, PSA, and family history of PCa, CYP17 was associated with PCa for men of African ancestry (Adjusted OR: 3.5, 95% CI: 1.2-10.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that genetic factors involved in the androgen pathway play a role in PCa risk among men of African ancestry.

A comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches to incorporating external information for the prediction of prostate cancer risk

We present the most comprehensive comparison to date of the predictive benefit of genetics in addition to currently used clinical variables, using genotype data for 33 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 1,547 Caucasian men from the placebo arm of the REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE®) trial. Moreover, we conducted a detailed comparison of three techniques for incorporating genetics into clinical risk prediction. The first method was a standard logistic regression model, which included separate terms for the clinical covariates and for each of the genetic markers. This approach ignores a substantial amount of external information concerning effect sizes for these Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS)-replicated SNPs. The second and third methods investigated two possible approaches to incorporating meta-analysed external SNP effect estimates - one via a weighted PCa 'risk' score based solely on the meta analysis estimates, and the other incorporating both the current and prior data via informative priors in a Bayesian logistic regression model. All methods demonstrated a slight improvement in predictive performance upon incorporation of genetics. The two methods that incorporated external information showed the greatest receiver-operating-characteristic AUCs increase from 0.61 to 0.64. The value of our methods comparison is likely to lie in observations of performance similarities, rather than difference, between three approaches of very different resource requirements. The two methods that included external information performed best, but only marginally despite substantial differences in complexity.

The impaired viability of prostate cancer cell lines by the recombinant plant kallikrein inhibitor

BACKGROUND

Kallikreins play a pivotal role in establishing prostate cancer.

RESULTS

In contrast to the classical Kunitz plant inhibitor SbTI, the recombinant kallikrein inhibitor (rBbKIm) led to prostate cancer cell death, whereas fibroblast viability was not affected.

CONCLUSION

rBbKIm shows selective cytotoxic effect and angiogenesis inhibition against prostate cancer cells.

SIGNIFICANCE

New actions of rBbKIm may contribute to understanding the mechanisms of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is the most common type of cancer, and kallikreins play an important role in the establishment of this disease. rBbKIm is the recombinant Bauhinia bauhinioides kallikreins inhibitor that was modified to include the RGD/RGE motifs of the inhibitor BrTI from Bauhinia rufa. This work reports the effects of rBbKIm on DU145 and PC3 prostate cancer cell lines. rBbKIm inhibited the cell viability of DU145 and PC3 cells but did not affect the viability of fibroblasts. rBbKIm caused an arrest of the PC3 cell cycle at the G0/G1 and G2/M phases but did not affect the DU145 cell cycle, although rBbKIm triggers apoptosis and cytochrome c release into the cytosol of both cell types. The differences in caspase activation were observed because rBbKIm treatment promoted activation of caspase-3 in DU145 cells, whereas caspase-9 but not caspase-3 was activated in PC3 cells. Because angiogenesis is important to the development of a tumor, the effect of rBbKIm in this process was also analyzed, and an inhibition of 49% was observed in in vitro endothelial cell capillary-like tube network formation. In summary, we demonstrated that different properties of the protease inhibitor rBbKIm may be explored for investigating the androgen-independent prostate cancer cell lines PC3 and DU145.

Optimization of thiazole analogues of resveratrol for induction of NAD(P)H:quinone reductase 1 (QR1)

NAD(P)H:quinone reductase 1 (QR1) belongs to a class of enzymes called cytoprotective enzymes. It exhibits its cancer protective activity mainly by inhibiting the formation of intracellular semiquinone radicals, and by generating α-tocopherolhydroquinone, which acts as a free radical scavenger. It is therefore believed that QR1 inducers can act as cancer chemopreventive agents. Resveratrol (1) is a naturally occurring stilbene derivative that requires a concentration of 21 μM to double QR1 activity (CD = 21 μM). The stilbene double bond of resveratrol was replaced with a thiadiazole ring and the phenols were eliminated to provide a more potent and selective derivative 2 (CD = 2.1 μM). Optimizing the substitution pattern of the two phenyl rings and the central heterocyclic linker led to a highly potent and selective QR1 inducer 9o with a CD value of 0.087 μM.

Ligand-independent activation of EphA2 by arachidonic acid induces metastasis-like behaviour in prostate cancer cells

Background:

High intake of omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) has been associated with clinical progression in prostate cancer (CaP). This study investigates the signalling mechanism by which the omega-6 PUFA arachidonic acid (AA) induces prostatic cellular migration to bone marrow stroma.

Methods:

Western blot analysis of the PC-3, PC3-GFP, DU 145 and LNCaP cells or their lipid raft (LR) components post AA stimulation was conducted in association with assays for adhesion and invasion through the bone marrow endothelial monolayers.

Results:

Arachidonic acid increased transendothelial migration of PC3-GFP cells (adhesion 37%±0.08, P=0.0124; transmigration 270%±0.145, P=0.0008). Akt, Src and focal adhesion kinase (FAK) pathways were induced by AA and integrally involved in transendothelial migration. LR were critical in AA uptake and induced Akt activity. Ephrin receptor A2 (EphA2), localised in LR, is expressed in DU 145 and PC-3 cells. Arachidonic acid induced a rapid increase of EphA2 Akt-dependent/ligand-independent activation, while knockdown of the EphrinA1 ligand decreased AA induced transendothelial migration, with an associated decrease in Src and FAK activity. Arachidonic acid activated Akt in EphA2⁻ LNCaP cells but failed to induce BMEC transendothelial invasion.

Conclusion:

Arachidonic acid induced stimulation of EphA2 in vitro is associated fundamentally with CaP epithelial migration across the endothelial barrier.

Systematic, evidence-based discovery of biomarkers at the NCI

In the past decade, biomarker discovery has become ubiquitous in cancer research. However, despite this interest in biomarker research, few newly-characterized biomarkers have emerged as clinically-used entities. Here, we review the current state of biomarker research in cancer and identify challenges that stall many biomarker discovery efforts. We outline a model for systematic biomarker discovery, exemplified by recent efforts in prostate cancer, in which bioinformatics plays a central role in identifying promising new candidate biomarkers. Finally, we review the role of the National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network (EDRN) in biomarker studies and the importance of EDRN-led efforts to establish a research standard for more effective biomarker discovery efforts.

The use of the finasteride-adjusted Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator in a Mexican referral population: a validation study

OBJECTIVES

To perform the first validation study of the finasteride-adjusted Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator (finPCPTRC) in a contemporary referral population in Mexico.

METHODS

837 patients referred to the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico, between 2005 and 2009 were used to validate the finPCPTRC by examining various measures of discrimination and calibration. Net benefit curve analysis was used to gain insight into the use of the finPCPTRC for clinical decisions.

RESULTS

Prostate cancer (PCa) incidence (72.8%) was high in this Mexican referral cohort and 45.7% of men who were diagnosed with PCa had high-grade lesions (HGPCa, Gleason score >6). 1.3% of the patients were taking finasteride. The finPCPTRC was a superior diagnostic tool compared to prostate-specific antigen alone when discriminating patients with PCa from those without PCa (AUC = 0.784 vs. AUC = 0.687, p < 0.001) and when discriminating patients with HGPCa from those without HGPCa (AUC = 0.768 vs. AUC = 0.739, p < 0.001). The finPCPTRC underestimated the risk of PCa but overestimated the risk of HGPCa (both p < 0.001). Compared with other strategies to opt for biopsy, the net benefit would be larger with utilization of the finPCPTRC for patients accepting higher risks of HGPCa.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of biopsy-detectable PCa and HGPCa were high and 1.3% of this referral cohort in Mexico was taking finasteride. The risks of PCa or HGPCa calculated by the finPCPTRC were not well calibrated for this referral Mexican population and new clinical diagnostic tools are needed.

Prostate cancer risk prediction in a urology clinic in Mexico

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate factors affecting the risk of prostate cancer (CaP) and high-grade disease (HGCaP, Gleason score ≥ 7) in a Mexican referral population, with comparison to the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator (PCPTRC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From a retrospective study of 826 patients who underwent prostate biopsy between January 2005 and December 2009 at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico, logistic regression was used to assess the effects of age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal exam (DRE), first-degree family history of CaP, and history of a prior prostate biopsy on CaP and HGCaP, separately. Internal discrimination, goodness-of-fit, and clinical utility of the resulting models were assessed with comparison to the PCPTRC.

RESULTS

Rates of both CaP (73.2%) and HGCaP (33.3%) were high among referral patients in this Mexican urology clinic. The PCPTRC generally underestimated the risk of CaP but overestimated the risk of HGCaP. Four factors influencing CaP on biopsy were logPSA, DRE, family history and a prior biopsy history (all P < 0.001). The internal AUC of the logistic model was 0.823 compared with 0.785 of the PCPTRC for CaP (P < 0.001). The same 4 factors were significantly associated with HGCaP as well and the AUC was 0.779 compared with 0.766 of the PCPTRC for HGCaP (P = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of screening programs or regular urologic checkups in Mexico imply that men typically first reach specialized clinics with a high cancer risk. This renders diagnostic tools developed on comparatively healthy populations, such as the PCPTRC, of lesser utility. Continued efforts are needed to develop and externally validate new clinical diagnostic tools specific to high-risk referral populations incorporating new biomarkers and more clinical characteristics.

Reduced levels of 5-α reductase 2 in adult prostate tissue and implications for BPH therapy

BACKGROUND

5-α reductase 2 (5-AR 2) is a key enzyme that is responsible of proper development of prostate tissue. Inhibition of 5-AR 2 has proven to be efficacious for management of urinary symptoms secondary benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, some patients are resistant to the therapeutic effects of 5-AR 2 inhibitor. We wished to determine why some benign non-cancerous adult human prostates do not express 5-AR 2, and hypothesized that methylation of 5-AR 2 promoter region correlated with low expression of 5-AR 2 protein.

METHODS

The transition zone of 42 human prostate tissues after radical prostatectomy was used for evaluation. Initially, 21 paraffin embedded samples were used to assess immunoreactivity to 5-AR 2 antibody in non-cancerous BPH samples. In the next 21 samples, fresh frozen prostate transition zone samples without cancer were assessed for immunoreactivity and methylation of the 5-AR 2 promoter using methyl-specific PCR.

RESULTS

We show that 6/21 (29%) of benign human prostate samples did not express the 5-AR 2 protein. Moreover, the promoter region of 5-AR 2 contains a CpG island that is methylated in benign prostate epithelial cells in culture and also in 39% (7/18) human prostate tissues. We show a strong correlation between methylation of the 5-AR 2 promoter region and absence of 5-AR 2 protein expression (P = 0.0025, Fisher's exact test).

CONCLUSIONS

Methylation of 5-AR 2 promoter may account for low or absent expression of 5-AR 2 in some human adult prostate tissues.

Usefulness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) rise as a marker of prostate cancer in men treated with dutasteride: lessons from the REDUCE study

OBJECTIVES

To determine if dutasteride-treated men can be monitored safely and adequately for prostate cancer based on data from the Reduction by Dutasteride in Prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) study. To analyse whether the use of treatment-specific criteria for repeat biopsy maintains the usefulness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level for detecting high grade cancers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The REDUCE study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled investigation of whether dutasteride (0.5 mg/day) reduced the risk of biopsy-detectable prostate cancer in men with a previous negative biopsy. The usefulness of PSA was evaluated using biopsy thresholds defined by National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines in the placebo group and any rise in PSA from nadir (the lowest PSA level achieved while in the study) in the dutasteride group. The number of cancers detected on biopsy in the absence of increased/suspicious PSA level as well as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for high grade prostate cancer detection were analysed by treatment group. Prostate cancer pathological characteristics were compared between men who did and did not meet biopsy thresholds.

RESULTS

Of 8231 men randomized, 3305 (dutasteride) and 3424 (placebo) underwent at least one prostate biopsy during the study and were included in the analysis. If only men meeting biopsy thresholds underwent biopsy, 25% (47/191) of Gleason 7 and 24% (7/29) of Gleason 8-10 cancers would have been missed in the dutasteride group, and 37% (78/209) of Gleason 7 and 22% (4/18) Gleason 8-10 cancers would have been missed in the placebo group. In both groups, the incidence of Gleason 7 and Gleason 8-10 cancers generally increased with greater rises in PSA. Sensitivity of PSA kinetics was higher and specificity was lower for the detection of Gleason 7-10 cancers in men treated with dutasteride vs placebo. Men with Gleason 7 and Gleason 8-10 cancer meeting biopsy thresholds had greater numbers of positive cores, percent core involvement, and biopsy cancer volume vs men not meeting thresholds.

CONCLUSION

Using treatment-specific biopsy thresholds, the present study shows that the ability of PSA kinetics to detect high grade prostate cancer is maintained with dutasteride compared with placebo in men with a previous negative biopsy. The sensitivity of PSA kinetics with dutasteride was similar to (Gleason 8-10) or higher than (Gleason 7-10) the placebo group; however, biopsy decisions based on a single increased PSA measurement from nadir in the dutasteride group resulted in a lower specificity compared with using a comparable biopsy threshold in the placebo group, indicating the importance of confirmation of PSA measurements.

Tumor markers in prostate cancer I: blood-based markers

The introduction of total prostate specific antigen (total PSA) testing in blood has revolutionized the detection and management of men with prostate cancer (PCa). The objective of this review was to discuss the challenges of PCa biomarker research, definition of the type of PCa biomarkers, the statistical considerations for biomarker discovery and validation, and to review the literature regarding total PSA velocity and novel blood-based biomarkers.

METHODS

An English-language literature review of the Medline database (1990 to August 2010) of published data on blood-based biomarkers and PCa was undertaken.

RESULTS

The inherent biological variability of total PSA levels affects the interpretation of any single result. Men who will eventually develop PCa have increased total PSA levels years or decades before the cancer is diagnosed. Total PSA velocity improves predictiveness of total PSA only marginally, limiting its value for PCa screening and prognostication. The combination of PSA molecular forms and other biomarkers improve PCa detection substantially. Several novel blood-based biomarkers such as human glandular kallikrein 2 (hK2), urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) and its receptor (uPAR), transforming growth factor-beta 1 (TGF-β1); interleukin-6 (IL-6) and its receptor (IL-6R) may help PCa diagnosis, staging, prognostication, and monitoring. Panels of biomarkers that capture the biologic potential of PCa are in the process of being validated for PCa prognostication.

CONCLUSIONS

PSA is a strong prognostic marker for long-term risk of clinically relevant cancer. However, there is a need for novel biomarkers that aid clinical decision making about biopsy and initial treatment. There is no doubt that progress will continue based on the integrated collaboration of researchers, clinicians and biomedical firms.

Chemoprevention of prostate cancer

Over the past two decades, many more men are diagnosed with prostate cancer then die of the disease. This increase in diagnosis has led to aggressive treatment of indolent disease in many individuals and has been the impetus for finding a means of reducing the risk of prostate cancer. In the past decade, there have been eight large trials of prostate cancer risk reduction using dietary supplements, 5α-reductase inhibitors, or anti-estrogens. The only two trials which have demonstrated efficacy are those involving 5α-reductase inhibitors: the PCPT (finasteride) and REDUCE (dutasteride). This review examines prostate cancer risk reduction, with emphasis on conclusions that can be drawn from these two landmark studies.

Further thoughts on preclinical animal models for cancer prevention: when is it best to start treatment? What are potential histopathologic endpoints?

One of the major questions in preclinical testing of potential cancer preventive agents is how to most closely approximate the testing protocol to be employed in phase III prevention trials. The nature of tumors arising in situ in animals allows one to initiate agent exposure from the time of tumor initiation until the time that preinvasive lesions already exist. The large phase III prevention trials have routinely followed participants for 3 to 7 years until a cancer endpoint, which generally implies that the timing of the intervention occurs further along during tumor progression. The objective of preclinical testing is to identify agents for large-scale phase III trials. Accordingly, initiating the tested intervention in preclinical studies later in the tumor progression process is more appropriate for any agent being proposed for phase III clinical trials. Furthermore, cancer, rather than advanced dysplastic lesions or other molecular markers (gene or protein expression), is the preferred primary endpoint. However, simultaneous examination of earlier designated "intermediate" endpoints (hyperplasias, dysplasias, or molecular markers) to determine whether their modulation correlates with that of the primary tumor endpoint would be useful, since these latter endpoints may be employed in phase II prevention trials.

Predicting prostate biopsy outcome: artificial neural networks and polychotomous regression are equivalent models

INTRODUCTION

Complex statistical models utilizing multiple inputs to derive a risk assessment may benefit prostate cancer (PC) detection where focus has been on prostate-specific antigen (PSA). This study develops a polychotomous logistic regression (PR) model and an artificial neural network (ANN) for predicting biopsy results, particularly for clinically significant PC.

METHODS

There were 3,025 men undergoing TRUS-guided biopsy (BX) with PSA <10 ng/ml selected. BX outcome classified as benign, atypical small acinar proliferation or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (ASAP/PIN), non-significant (NSPC) or clinically significant PC (CSPC). PR and ANN models were developed to distinguish between BX categories. Predictors were age, PSA, abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE), positive transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and prostate volume.

RESULTS

Among the BXs, 44% were benign, 14% ASAP/PIN, 16% NSPC and 25% CSPC. Median age, PSA and volume were 64 years, 5.7 ng/ml and 50 cc. TRUS lesion was present in 47%, and DRE was abnormal in 39%. PR and ANN models did not differ on percentage BX outcomes correctly predicted (55, 57%, respectively) and were equally poor for both ASAP/PIN (0%) and NSPC (2%). For PR and ANN, 74-78% ASAP/PIN predicted benign, 2% NSPC and 20-24% CSPC. For NSPC, 69-71% predicted benign, 27-29% CSPC. Benign outcomes were well identified (86-88%), although 12-13% classified CSPC. CSPC was correctly identified in 65-66% with misclassifications largely benign (33% for PR and ANN).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither PR nor ANN was able to distinguish between the four biopsy outcomes: ASAP/PIN and NSPC were not distinguished from benign or CSPC. ANN did not perform better than PR. Inclusion of additional predictors may increase the performance of statistical models in predicting BX outcome.

Validation in a multiple urology practice cohort of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator for predicting prostate cancer detection

PURPOSE

The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial prostate cancer risk calculator was developed in a clinical trial cohort that does not represent men routinely referred for prostate biopsy. We assessed the generalizability of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator in a cohort more representative of patients referred for consideration of prostate biopsy in American urology practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing prostate biopsy by 12 urologists at 5 sites were enrolled in an Early Detection Research Network cohort. The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator was validated by examining area underneath the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity and calibration comparing observed vs predicted risk of prostate cancer detection.

RESULTS

Cancer incidence was greater (43% vs 22%, p = 0.001) in the Early Detection Research Network validation cohort (645) compared to the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial group (5,519). Early Detection Research Network participants were younger and more racially diverse, and had more abnormal digital rectal examinations and higher prostate specific antigen than Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial participants (all p <0.001). Cancer severity was worse in the Early Detection Research Network cohort than in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (Gleason 7 or higher 60% vs 21%, p <0.001). Nevertheless, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator was superior to prostate specific antigen alone for predicting cancer in the Early Detection Research Network (AUC 0.691 vs 0.655, p = 0.009) and calibration confirmed that the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk score accurately predicted individual risks in the Early Detection Research Network cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences between the Early Detection Research Network validation cohort and the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial cohort underscore the importance of validating calculator performance in the multicenter urology practice setting. Our findings extend the applicability of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator for measuring the risk of prostate cancer detection on biopsy to the routine American urology practice setting.

Risk factors, prevention and early detection of prostate cancer

Approximately one in six men in the United States will develop prostate cancer during their lifetime. Genetic and environmental variables play a role in determining prostate cancer risk. This article highlights the latest evidence regarding the risk factors for prostate cancer. The current screening strategies using prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination are also discussed, as well as the limitations of these protocols and potential methods for improving early detection.

Evaluation of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk calculator in a high-risk screening population

STUDY TYPE

Diagnostic (exploratory cohort).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2b.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) risk calculator in a screening cohort of young, racially diverse, high-risk men with a low baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment Program (PRAP). The PCPT calculator provides an assessment of prostate cancer risk based on age, PSA level, race, previous biopsy, and family history.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligibility for PRAP includes men aged 35-69 years who are African-American, have a family history of prostate cancer, or have a known BRCA1/2 mutation. PCPT risk scores were determined for PRAP participants, and were compared to observed prostate cancer rates.

RESULTS

In all, 624 participants were evaluated, including 382 (61.2%) African-American men and 242 (38.7%) men with a family history of prostate cancer; the median (range) age was 49.0 (34.0-69.0) years and the median PSA level 0.9 (0.1-27.2) ng/mL. The PCPT risk score correlated with prostate cancer diagnosis, as the median baseline risk score in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer was 31.3%, vs 14.2% in patients not diagnosed with prostate cancer (P < 0.001). The PCPT calculator similarly stratified the risk of diagnosis of Gleason score > or =7 disease, as the median risk score was 36.2% in patients diagnosed with Gleason > or =7 prostate cancer vs 15.2% in all other participants (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The PCPT risk calculator score was found to stratify prostate cancer risk in a cohort of young, primarily African-American men with a low baseline PSA level. These results support further evaluation of this predictive tool for assessing the risk of prostate cancer in high-risk men.

Steroidogenesis inhibitors alter but do not eliminate androgen synthesis mechanisms during progression to castration-resistance in LNCaP prostate xenografts

In castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) many androgen-regulated genes become re-expressed and tissue androgen levels increase despite low serum levels. We and others have recently reported that CRPC tumor cells can de novo synthesize androgens from adrenal steroid precursors or cholesterol and that high levels of progesterone exist in LNCaP tumors after castration serving perhaps as an intermediate in androgen synthesis. Herein, we compare androgen synthesis from [(3)H-progesterone] in the presence of specific steroidogenesis inhibitors and anti-androgens in steroid starved LNCaP cells and CRPC tumors. Similarly, we compare steroid profiles in LNCaP tumors at different stages of CRPC progression. Steroidogenesis inhibitors targeting CYP17A1 and SRD5A2 significantly altered but did not eliminate androgen synthesis from progesterone in steroid starved LNCaP cells and CRPC tumors. Upon exposure to inhibitors of steroidogenesis prostate cancer cells adapt gradually during CRPC progression to synthesize DHT in a compensatory manner through alternative feed-forward mechanisms. Furthermore, tumors obtained immediately after castration are significantly less efficient at metabolizing progesterone ( approximately 36%) and produce a different steroid profile to CRPC tumors. Optimal targeting of the androgen axis may be most effective when tumors are least efficient at synthesizing androgens. Confirmatory studies in humans are required to validate these findings.

Postoperative PSA and PSA velocity identify presence of prostate cancer after various surgical interventions for benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values can distinguish those with prostate cancer (CaP) from those with histologic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) only after surgical intervention. Prostatic adenoma inevitably remains after BPH surgery; therefore, patients remain at risk of developing CaP. Although the PSA level can be used for CaP screening in this population, it might be influenced by the efficacies of different BPH procedures.

METHODS

We performed a review of patients who had undergone transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP; n = 343), holmium laser resection of the prostate (HoLRP; n = 54), or open prostatectomy (OP; n = 68). The PSA and PSA velocity values were collected at regular intervals both pre- and postoperatively for all patients. Only patients with histologic BPH and those with incidental CaP who underwent a watchful waiting strategy were included.

RESULTS

The average preoperative PSA values were significantly different between the TURP, HoLRP, and OP groups. Only 1 patient had incidental CaP in the HoLRP group. No differences were present between the preoperative PSA values for patients with histologic BPH and those with incidental CaP undergoing a watchful waiting strategy (P > .05). However, the postoperative PSA values were increased in the patients with CaP (watchful waiting compared with the patient with BPH only (2.4 vs 1.7 ng/mL TURP and 4.1 vs 1.1 ng/mL OP). Similarly, patients with incidental CaP had a significantly elevated postoperative mean PSA velocity compared with patients without CaP (0.38 vs 0.06 ng/mL/y TURP and 0.47 vs -0.13 ng/mL/y OP; P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative PSA and PSA velocity measurements can be used to distinguish patients with CaP from those with histologic BPH only.