Male awareness of prostate cancer risk remains poor in relatives of women with germline variants in DNA-repair genes

Abstract.

Objective

The aim of this study is to evaluate male awareness of developing prostate cancer (PCa) in families with germline DNA-repair genes (DRG) variants.

Materials and methods

Data were collected from a prospective, monocentric cohort study. The study was conducted in a university hospital with a multidisciplinary approach to the patient (collaboration of the Departments of Oncology, Urology, Pathology, Radiology, and Medical Genetics Laboratory). We recruited healthy males, relatives of families of women with breast or ovarian cancer who tested positive for pathogenic variants (PVs) or likely pathogenic variants (LPVs) in DRGs. A dedicated PCa screening was designed and offered to men aged 35 to 69 years, based on early visits with digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate health index (PHI) measurement, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and, if necessary, targeted/systematic prostate biopsies. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the willingness of healthy men from families with a DRG variants detected in female relatives affected with breast and/or ovarian cancer to be tested for the presence of familial PVs. The secondary endpoints were the acceptance to participate if resulted positive and compliance with the screening programme.

Results

Over 1256 families, of which 139 resulted positive for PVs in DRGs, we identified 378 'healthy' men aged between 35 and 69 years old. Two hundred sixty-one (69.0%) refused to be tested for DRG variants, 66 (17.5%) declared to have been previously tested, and 51 (13.5%) males were interested to be tested. Between those previously tested and those who accepted to be tested, 62 (53.0%) were positive for a DRG variant, and all of them accepted to participate in the subsequent surveillance steps. The main limitation is that is a single-centre study and a short follow-up.

Conclusions

All men tested positive for a DRG variants agreed to go under the surveillance scheme. However, only 31% of 'men at risk' (i.e., relative of a DRG variant carrier) expressed their willingness to be tested for the familial DRG variant. This observation strongly supports the urgent need to implement awareness of genetic risk for PCa within the male population.

Awareness of genetic risk for prostate cancer (PCa) in men from families with germline mutations in DNA-repair genes

328

Background: Although one of the most important risk factors for prostate cancer (PCa) is a family history of the disease, there is a poor awareness of genetic risk. The aim of the current study is to investigate the awareness of genetic risk for PCa in men belonging to female families with germline variants in DNA-repair genes (DRGs). Methods: Data were extracted by a prospective observational study designed to select men with germline pathogenic variants (PVs) and offer them a dedicated PCa screening. The selection of probands was performed by genetic counseling and testing of male grade I relatives of female patients with a PVs. Male candidates were identified after reviewing the genealogical trees of all women who had received the diagnosis of breast and/or ovarian cancer and tested positive for a PVs. All the probands, 35-69 yrs old, who resulted positive for PVs were offered to participate to a specific PCa screening based on annually digital rectal examination (DRE), detection of PHI, which is a blood test including total PSA, free PSA, free/total PSA and -2proPSA, and multiparametric MRI. The primary outcome was the “willing to be tested”, defined as a proxy for male awareness of PCa risk. The secondary endpoint was the acceptance rate to be screened. Results: We reviewed the genealogical trees of breast/ovarian cancer female patients from January 2017 to December 2021 and we identified, over 1256 families, 139 positive cases for PVs in DRGs. Among 139 families, we identified 378 “healthy” 35-69 yrs old men, who were offered a genetic counseling, and if they agree a genetic testing. Overall 117/378 (31%) healthy males declared to be interested to be tested. Out of the 51 new tests (66 men already tested out of the study), we found 30 (58.8%) positive men. All the new positive tested men accepted to attend the PCa screening. Living in Northern Italy, having at least one child and higher (degree) level of education were the strongest predictors of willing for testing (p<0.01). Conclusions: Our data reveals a limited will to be tested, but all men tested positive for PVs accepted to participate to the PCa screening. These findings strongly support the urgent need to implement awareness of genetic risk for PCa.

Randomized phase III clinical trial of neoadjuvant intravesical mitomycin C (MMC) treatment in patients with primary treatment-naïve non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC)

TPS578

Background: Approximately 75-85% of vesical urothelial carcinomas are non-muscle invasive bladder cancers (NMIBC). The primary treatment is transurethral resection (TUR) followed by adjuvant intravesical therapies with immunotherapy (BCG) and/or chemotherapy agents (i.e. mitomycin C - MMC). Unfortunately, the response to intravesical treatments is variable and incomplete and there is a un-met clinical need to improve its efficacy for reducing the recurrence rate and progression to muscle invasive BC (MIBC). Recently, has been showed that MMC induces immunogenic cell death (ICD), determining the expression of specific damage signals, like HMGB1 molecule, that favors the phagocytosis of dying tumor cells, the activation of innate immune cells and the presentation of tumor antigens to T lymphocytes [1]. The identification of ICD as a novel immune-related mechanism of action of MMC could provide opportunities to optimize bladder cancer management by proposing the use of MMC in a “neoadjuvant” setting. The aim of current clinical trial is to test the hypothesis that the neoadjuvant instillation of MMC in patients with NMIBC may reduce the recurrence rate and/or progression to MIBC. Methods: This is a prospective phase III randomized clinical trial in patients with primary treatment-naïve NMIBC recruiting since March 2022 (EudraCT 2021-003751-42_studio ICH-013-MMC). Patients are randomized 1:1 to neo-adjuvant MMC or standard of care. Patients enrolled in the neo-MMC group receive two intravesical instillations of MMC (40 mg/40 ml saline) in the 2 weeks before (days: -14 and -7) the scheduled TUR (day: 0). After TUR, as for clinical practice, both controls and neoMMC subjects, undergo adjuvant treatment, if required, based on the histological evaluation of the tumor and following EAU/PMID: 33040478 guidelines. The primary endpoint of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of MMC neoadjuvant treatment in reducing the recurrence rate of BC calculated as the proportion of patients who achieve a complete response (no evidence of BC after 3, 6, 12 and 24 mo.). The secondary clinical endpoint will be the analysis of the rate of grade and stage progression to MIBC in case of recurrence and the correlation with specific biomarker (i.e. expression of HMGB1). Consider that the primary aim of the study is to see a reduction of relapse, leading to an HR of 0.6, estimating on the control group a 30% relapse free at 12 months. With equal-sized group, a two-sided significance level test (α =0.05) with power 80% power (β=0.2), and assume that recruitment was to be terminated after 12 months, with a 2-year follow up, the required sample size is approximate 160 patient, 80 in each group (control / neoMMC). References: 1. Oresta B, et al Sci Transl Med. Jan 6;13(575):eaba6110 Clinical trial information: EudraCT 2021-003751-42_studio ICH-013 (MMC) .

Managing chronic bladder diseases with the administration of exogenous glycosaminoglycans: an update on the evidence

Although the pathophysiology of acute chronic cystitis and other 'sensory' disorders, i.e. painful bladder syndrome (PBS) or interstitial cystitis (IC), often remains multifactorial, there is a wide consensus that such clinical conditions may arise from a primary defective urothelium lining or from damaged glycosaminoglycans (GAGs). A 'cascade' of events starting from GAG injury, which fails to heal, may lead to chronic bladder epithelial damage and neurogenic inflammation. To restore the GAG layer is becoming the main aim of new therapies for the treatment of chronic cystitis and PBS/IC. Preliminary experiences with GAG replenishment for different pathological conditions involving the lower urinary tract have been reported. There is a range of commercially available intravesical formulations of these components, alone or in combination. Literature evidence shows that exogenous intravesical hyaluronic acid markedly reduces recurrences of urinary tract infections (UTIs). Patients treated with exogenous GAGs have fewer UTI recurrences, a longer time to recurrence and a greater improvement in quality of life. Exogenous intravesical GAGs have been used for the treatment of PBS/IC. Despite the limitations of most of the studies, findings confirmed the role of combination therapy with hyaluronic acid and chondroitin sulfate as a safe and effective option for the treatment of PBS/IC. To prevent and/or treat radiotherapy and chemotherapy induced cystitis, GAG replenishment therapy has been used showing preliminary encouraging results. The safety profile of exogenous GAGs has been reported to be very favourable, without adverse events of particular significance.

Endorectal multiparametric 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging associated with systematic cognitive biopsies does not increase prostate cancer detection rate: a randomized prospective trial

PURPOSE

To investigate prostate cancer (PC) detection rate, employing endorectal multiparametric 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) driving subsequent cognitive systematic prostatic biopsy (CSPB) versus a homogenous group of patients who did not undergo endorectal MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A series of patients with a first negative biopsy were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized into two groups: Group A: patients underwent MRI and subsequent CSPB; Group B: patients that did not undergo MRI. Each patient underwent a 13-core sampling. Patients from Group A had four cores more for each MRI suspected lesion. The cancer detection rate was calculated for each group with regard to possible matches or mismatches between MRI evidence and pathological reports.

RESULTS

Two hundred consecutive patients were investigated. Fifty out of 200 (25 %) patients had a diagnosis of PC, 24 in Group A and 26 in Group B. In Group A, 67 patients (67 %) were positive for suspected lesions at the MRI. The mismatch between MRI findings and the CSPB outcome was 61 % with an MRI-driven detection rate of 15 %. Group B detection rate was 26 % with no significant differences versus Group A (P = NS). Patient discomfort was higher in Group A (82 %). The accuracy of CSPB was 41 % with a positive predictive value of 22.3 %. This rate is lower in high-grade cancers (11.9 %). The cost-effectiveness was higher in Group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer detection rate does not improve by CSPB. The accuracy of CSPB was lower in high-grade PC, and a higher cost was found with CSPB.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: recent advances

Robot assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) represents the leading application of robotic surgery in the urologic field and it has become the main treatment option for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in the USA In the present review we summarized and critically analyzed the literature of the past five years about this widely used robotic procedure. RARP has continuously evolved in terms of technical modifications and procedural steps. Long-term data are now available, suggesting comparable oncological outcomes to those of open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Good functional outcomes have also been demonstrated. Technological innovations and the introduction of more advanced robotic platforms featuring novel arm-integrated equipment, together with a mature clinical experience with the robotic approach, are likely to lead towards optimal outcomes. Despite the expanding clinical implementation of RARP in the management of prostate cancer, some issues related to this procedure remain matter of debate, such as costs, comparative outcomes versus other approaches, and its role in high risk disease.