8 research outputs found

    Histopathological features of prostate cancer conspicuity on multiparametric MRI: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    Introduction Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has improved risk stratification for men with suspected prostate cancer. Indeed, mpMRI-visible tumours tend to be larger and of higher pathological grade than mpMRI-invisible tumours; however, concern remains around significant cancer that is undetected by mpMRI. There has been considerable recent interest to investigate whether tumour conspicuity on mpMRI is associated with additional histopathological features (including cellular density, microvessel density and unusual prostate cancer subtypes), which may have important clinical implications in both diagnosis and prognosis. Furthermore, analysis of these features may help reveal the radiobiology that underpins the actual mechanisms of mpMRI visibility (and invisibility) of prostate tumours. Here, we describe a protocol for a systematic review of the histopathological basis of prostate cancer conspicuity on mpMRI. Methods and analysis A systematic search of the MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases will be conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines will be used to guide screening, thematic reporting and conclusions drawn from all eligible studies. Included papers will be full-text, English-language articles, comparing the histopathological characteristics of mpMRI-visible lesions and mpMRI-invisible tumours. All studies published between January 1950 and January 2020 will be eligible for inclusion. Studies using confirmatory immunohistochemistry for the identification of immune subsets or structural components will be included. Study bias and quality will be assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. To ensure methodological rigour, this protocol is written in accordance with the PRISMA Protocol 2015 checklist. If appropriate, a meta-analysis will be conducted comparing histopathological feature frequency between mpMRI-visible and mpMRI-invisible disease. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval will be required as this is an academic review of published literature. Findings will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at national and international conferences

    Co-targeting PIM and PI3K/mTOR using multikinase inhibitor AUM302 and a combination of AZD-1208 and BEZ235 in prostate cancer

    Get PDF
    Abstract PIM and PI3K/mTOR pathways are often dysregulated in prostate cancer, and may lead to decreased survival, increased metastasis and invasion. The pathways are heavily interconnected and act on a variety of common effectors that can lead to the development of resistance to drug inhibitors. Most current treatments exhibit issues with toxicity and resistance. We investigated the novel multikinase PIM/PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, AUM302, versus a combination of the PIM inhibitor, AZD-1208, and the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor BEZ235 (Dactolisib) to determine their impact on mRNA and phosphoprotein expression, as well as their functional efficacy. We have determined that around 20% of prostate cancer patients overexpress the direct targets of these drugs, and this cohort are more likely to have a high Gleason grade tumour (≥ Gleason 8). A co-targeted inhibition approach offered broader inhibition of genes and phosphoproteins in the PI3K/mTOR pathway, when compared to single kinase inhibition. The preclinical inhibitor AUM302, used at a lower dose, elicited a comparable or superior functional outcome compared with combined AZD-1208 + BEZ235, which have been investigated in clinical trials, and could help to reduce treatment toxicity in future trials. We believe that a co-targeting approach is a viable therapeutic strategy that should be developed further in pre-clinical studies

    Evaluation of PSA and PSA Density in a Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Diagnostic Pathway for Suspected Prostate Cancer: The INNOVATE Trial

    No full text
    Objectives: To assess the clinical outcomes of mpMRI before biopsy and evaluate the space remaining for novel biomarkers. Methods: The INNOVATE study was set up to evaluate the validity of novel fluidic biomarkers in men with suspected prostate cancer who undergo pre-biopsy mpMRI. We report the characteristics of this clinical cohort, the distribution of clinical serum biomarkers, PSA and PSA density (PSAD), and compare the mpMRI Likert scoring system to the Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System v2.1 (PI-RADS) in men undergoing biopsy. Results: 340 men underwent mpMRI to evaluate suspected prostate cancer. 193/340 (57%) men had subsequent MRI-targeted prostate biopsy. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csigPCa), i.e., overall Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 of any length OR maximum cancer core length (MCCL) ≥4 mm of any grade including any 3 + 3, was found in 96/195 (49%) of biopsied patients. Median PSA (and PSAD) was 4.7 (0.20), 8.0 (0.17), and 9.7 (0.31) ng/mL (ng/mL/mL) in mpMRI scored Likert 3,4,5 respectively for men with csigPCa on biopsy. The space for novel biomarkers was shown to be within the group of men with mpMRI scored Likert3 (178/340) and 4 (70/350), in whom an additional of 40% (70/178) men with mpMRI-scored Likert3, and 37% (26/70) Likert4 could have been spared biopsy. PSAD is already considered clinically in this cohort to risk stratify patients for biopsy, despite this 67% (55/82) of men with mpMRI-scored Likert3, and 55% (36/65) Likert4, who underwent prostate biopsy had a PSAD below a clinical threshold of 0.15 (or 0.12 for men aged <50 years). Different thresholds of PSA and PSAD were assessed in mpMRI-scored Likert4 to predict csigPCa on biopsy, to achieve false negative levels of ≤5% the proportion of patients whom who test as above the threshold were unsuitably high at 86 and 92% of patients for PSAD and PSA respectively. When PSA was re tested in a sub cohort of men repeated PSAD showed its poor reproducibility with 43% (41/95) of patients being reclassified. After PI-RADS rescoring of the biopsied lesions, 66% (54/82) of the Likert3 lesions received a different PI-RADS score. Conclusions: The addition of simple biochemical and radiological markers (Likert and PSAD) facilitate the streamlining of the mpMRI-diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer but there remains scope for improvement, in the introduction of novel biomarkers for risk assessment in Likert3 and 4 patients, future application of novel biomarkers tested in a Likert cohort would also require re-optimization around Likert3/PI-RADS2, as well as reproducibility testing
    corecore