African American men with low-grade prostate cancer have increased disease recurrence after prostatectomy compared with Caucasian men.

PURPOSE: To explore whether disparities in outcomes exist between African American (AA) and Caucasian (CS) men with low-grade prostate cancer and similar cancer of the prostate risk assessment-postsurgery (CAPRA-S) features following prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: The overall cohort consisted of 1,265 men (234 AA and 1,031 CS) who met the National comprehensive cancer network criteria for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer and underwent RP between 1990 and 2012. We first evaluated whether clinical factors were associated with adverse pathologic outcomes and freedom from biochemical failure (FFbF) using the entire cohort. Next, we studied a subset of 705 men (112 AA and 593 CS) who had pathologic Gleason score≤6 (low-grade disease). Using this cohort, we determined whether race affected FFbF in men with RP-proven low-grade disease and similar CAPRA-S scores. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 27 months, the overall 7-year FFbF rate was 86% vs. 79% in CS and AA men, respectively (P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in one or more adverse pathologic features between CS vs. AA men (27% vs. 31%; P = 0.35) or CAPRA-S score (P = 0.28). In the subset analysis of patients with low-grade disease, AA race was associated with worse FFbF outcomes (P = 0.002). Furthermore, AA race was a significant predictor of FFbF in men with low-grade disease (hazard ratio = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.08-3.72; P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: AA race is a predictor of worse FFbF outcomes in men with low-grade disease after RP. These results suggest that a subset of AA men with low-grade disease may benefit from more aggressive treatment

Phase I dose escalation trial of stereotactic radiotherapy prior to robotic prostatectomy in high risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the safety of combining preoperative stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with robotic radical prostatectomy (RP) for high risk prostate cancer (HRCaP). Many patients with HRCaP will require adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy after RP. The addition of preoperative SBRT before RP may spare patients from subsequent prolonged courses of RT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had NCCN HRCaP and received a total of 25 Gy or 30 Gy in five daily fractions of SBRT to the prostate and seminal vesicles followed by robotic RP with pelvic lymphadenectomy 31-45 days later. The primary endpoint was prevalence of acute genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Secondary endpoints were patient-reported quality of life (QOL) and biochemical recurrence (BcR) RESULTS: Three patients received preoperative SBRT to 25 Gy and four received 30 Gy. Median follow-up was 18 months. Highest toxicity was grade 2 and 3 in six (85.7%) and one (14.3%) patients, respectively. All patients developed grade 2 erectile dysfunction and 4 of 7 (57%) developed grade 2 urinary incontinence (UI) within a month after surgery. One patient developed acute grade 3 UI, but there was no grade ≥ 4 toxicity. One patient experienced acute grade 2 hemorrhoidal bleeding. On QOL, acute GU complaints were common and peaked within 3 months. Bowel symptoms were mild. Two patients with pN+ experienced BcR. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative SBRT before robotic RP in HRCaP is feasible and safe.  The severity of acute GU toxicity with preoperative SBRT may be worse than RP alone, while bowel toxicity was mild

African American men with low-grade prostate cancer have increased disease recurrence after prostatectomy compared with Caucasian men.

PURPOSE: To explore whether disparities in outcomes exist between African American (AA) and Caucasian (CS) men with low-grade prostate cancer and similar cancer of the prostate risk assessment-postsurgery (CAPRA-S) features following prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: The overall cohort consisted of 1,265 men (234 AA and 1,031 CS) who met the National comprehensive cancer network criteria for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer and underwent RP between 1990 and 2012. We first evaluated whether clinical factors were associated with adverse pathologic outcomes and freedom from biochemical failure (FFbF) using the entire cohort. Next, we studied a subset of 705 men (112 AA and 593 CS) who had pathologic Gleason score≤6 (low-grade disease). Using this cohort, we determined whether race affected FFbF in men with RP-proven low-grade disease and similar CAPRA-S scores. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 27 months, the overall 7-year FFbF rate was 86% vs. 79% in CS and AA men, respectively (P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in one or more adverse pathologic features between CS vs. AA men (27% vs. 31%; P = 0.35) or CAPRA-S score (P = 0.28). In the subset analysis of patients with low-grade disease, AA race was associated with worse FFbF outcomes (P = 0.002). Furthermore, AA race was a significant predictor of FFbF in men with low-grade disease (hazard ratio = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.08-3.72; P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: AA race is a predictor of worse FFbF outcomes in men with low-grade disease after RP. These results suggest that a subset of AA men with low-grade disease may benefit from more aggressive treatment

The impact of body mass index on treatment outcomes for patients with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer

Background: Little is known about the relationship between preoperative body mass index and need for adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) following radical prostatectomy. The goal of this study was to evaluate the utility of body mass index in predicting adverse clinical outcomes which require adjuvant RT among men with organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: We used a prospective cohort of 1,170 low-intermediate PCa risk men who underwent radical prostatectomy and evaluated the effect of body mass index on adverse pathologic features and freedom from biochemical failure (FFbF). Clinical and pathologic variables were compared across the body mass index groups using an analysis of variance model for continuous variables or χ2 for categorical variables. Factors related to adverse pathologic features were examined using logistic regression models. Time to biochemical recurrence was compared across the groups using a log-rank survivorship analysis. Multivariable analysis predicting biochemical recurrence was conducted with a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Patients with elevated body mass index (defined as body mass index ≥25 kg/m2) had greater extraprostatic extension (p = 0.004), and positive surgical margins (p = 0.01). Elevated body mass index did not correlate with preoperative risk groupings (p = 0.94). However, when compared with non-obese patients (body mass index <30 kg/m2), obese patients (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) were much more likely to have higher rate of adverse pathologic features (p = 0.006). In patients with low- and intermediate- risk disease, obesity was strongly associated with rate of pathologic upgrading of tumors (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02), respectively. After controlling for known preoperative risk factors, body mass index was independently associated with ≥2 adverse pathologic features (p = 0.002), an indicator for adjuvant RT as well as FFbF (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Body mass index of ≥30 kg/m2 is independently associated with adverse pathologic features, which is an indicator for additional RT, particularly in patients with low-intermediate risk disease. Future studies may determine if this select group of patients may be best treated with definitive RT to reduce toxicity from additional RT following radical prostatectomy. We propose including body mass index in clinical decision-making for appropriate treatment recommendation for patients with low-intermediate risk PCa

miRNAs associated with prostate cancer risk and progression

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy among men in the US. Though considerable improvement in the diagnosis of prostate cancer has been achieved in the past decade, predicting disease outcome remains a major clinical challenge. Recent expression profiling studies in prostate cancer suggest microRNAs (miRNAs) may serve as potential biomarkers for prostate cancer risk and disease progression. miRNAs comprise a large family of about 22-nucleotide-long non-protein coding RNAs, regulate gene expression post-transcriptionally and participate in the regulation of numerous cellular processes. In this review, we discuss the current status of miRNA in studies evaluating the disease progression of prostate cancer. The discussion highlights key findings from previous studies, which reported the role of miRNAs in risk and progression of prostate cancer, providing an understanding of the influence of miRNA on prostate cancer. Our review indicates that somewhat consistent results exist between these studies and reports on several prostate cancer related miRNAs. Present promising candidates are miR-1, −21, 106b, 141, −145, −205, −221, and −375, which are the most frequently studied and seem to be the most promising for diagnosis and prognosis for prostate cancer. Nevertheless, the findings from previous studies suggest miRNAs may play an important role in the risk and progression of prostate cancer as promising biomarkers

Computer extracted gland features from H&E predicts prostate cancer recurrence comparably to a genomic companion diagnostic test: a large multi-site study

Existing tools for post-radical prostatectomy (RP) prostate cancer biochemical recurrence (BCR) prognosis rely on human pathologist-derived parameters such as tumor grade, with the resulting inter-reviewer variability. Genomic companion diagnostic tests such as Decipher tend to be tissue destructive, expensive, and not routinely available in most centers. We present a tissue non-destructive method for automated BCR prognosis, termed "Histotyping", that employs computational image analysis of morphologic patterns of prostate tissue from a single, routinely acquired hematoxylin and eosin slide. Patients from two institutions (n = 214) were used to train Histotyping for identifying high-risk patients based on six features of glandular morphology extracted from RP specimens. Histotyping was validated for post-RP BCR prognosis on a separate set of n = 675 patients from five institutions and compared against Decipher on n = 167 patients. Histotyping was prognostic of BCR in the validation set (p < 0.001, univariable hazard ratio [HR] = 2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.03-3.93, concordance index [c-index] = 0.68, median years-to-BCR: 1.7). Histotyping was also prognostic in clinically stratified subsets, such as patients with Gleason grade group 3 (HR = 4.09) and negative surgical margins (HR = 3.26). Histotyping was prognostic independent of grade group, margin status, pathological stage, and preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (multivariable p < 0.001, HR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.40-3.10, n = 648). The combination of Histotyping, grade group, and preoperative PSA outperformed Decipher (c-index = 0.75 vs. 0.70, n = 167). These results suggest that a prognostic classifier for prostate cancer based on digital images could serve as an alternative or complement to molecular-based companion diagnostic tests

Genomic Testing in Localized Prostate Cancer Can Identify Subsets of African Americans With Aggressive Disease

BACKGROUND: Personalized genomic classifiers have transformed the management of prostate cancer (PCa) by identifying the most aggressive subsets of PCa. Nevertheless, the performance of genomic classifiers to risk classify African American men is thus far lacking in a prospective setting. METHODS: This is a prospective study of the Decipher genomic classifier for National Comprehensive Cancer Network low- and intermediate-risk PCa. Study-eligible non-African American men were matched to African American men. Diagnostic biopsy specimens were processed to estimate Decipher scores. Samples accrued in NCT02723734, a prospective study, were interrogated to determine the genomic risk of reclassification (GrR) between conventional clinical risk classifiers and the Decipher score. RESULTS: The final analysis included a clinically balanced cohort of 226 patients with complete genomic information (113 African American men and 113 non-African American men). A higher proportion of African American men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network-classified low-risk (18.2%) and favorable intermediate-risk (37.8%) PCa had a higher Decipher score than non-African American men. Self-identified African American men were twice more likely than non-African American men to experience GrR (relative risk [RR] = 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02 to 4.90; P = .04). In an ancestry-determined race model, we consistently validated a higher risk of reclassification in African American men (RR = 5.26, 95% CI = 1.66 to 16.63; P = .004). Race-stratified analysis of GrR vs non-GrR tumors also revealed molecular differences in these tumor subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of genomic classifiers with clinically based risk classification can help identify the subset of African American men with localized PCa who harbor high genomic risk of early metastatic disease. It is vital to identify and appropriately risk stratify the subset of African American men with aggressive disease who may benefit from more targeted interventions

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer—metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022

Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence. Objective: To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: The experts voted on controversial questions where high- level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration- resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration- resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions. Results and limitations: The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Conclusions: These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Twitter summary: Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer. Take-home message: At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration- resistant prostate cancer is summarised here

KLK3 SNP-SNP interactions for prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness

Risk classification for prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness and underlying mechanisms remain inadequate. Interactions between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) may provide a solution to fill these gaps. To identify SNP-SNP interactions in the four pathways (the angiogenesis-, mitochondria-, miRNA-, and androgen metabolism-related pathways) associated with PCa aggressiveness, we tested 8587 SNPs for 20,729 cases from the PCa consortium. We identified 3 KLK3 SNPs, and 1083 (P-9) and 3145 (P-5) SNP-SNP interaction pairs significantly associated with PCa aggressiveness. These SNP pairs associated with PCa aggressiveness were more significant than each of their constituent SNP individual effects. The majority (98.6%) of the 3145 pairs involved KLK3. The 3 most common gene-gene interactions were KLK3-COL4A1:COL4A2, KLK3-CDH13, and KLK3-TGFBR3. Predictions from the SNP interaction-based polygenic risk score based on 24 SNP pairs are promising. The prevalence of PCa aggressiveness was 49.8%, 21.9%, and 7.0% for the PCa cases from our cohort with the top 1%, middle 50%, and bottom 1% risk profiles. Potential biological functions of the identified KLK3 SNP-SNP interactions were supported by gene expression and protein-protein interaction results. Our findings suggest KLK3 SNP interactions may play an important role in PCa aggressiveness.</p