A Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument to Assess Symptom Burden and Predict Survival in Patients with Advanced Cancer: Flipping the Paradigm to Improve Timing of Palliative and End-of-Life Discussions and Reduce Unwanted Health Care Costs.

BACKGROUND: Discussions regarding palliative care and end-of-life care issues are frequently delayed past the time of usefulness, resulting in unwanted medical care. We sought to develop a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument that allows patients to voice their symptom burdens and facilitate timing of discussions. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: A seven-item PRO instrument (Cota Patient Assessed Symptom Score-7 item [CPASS-7]) covering physical performance status, pain, burden, and depression was administered (September 2015 through October 2016) with correlation to overall survival, correcting for time to complete survey since diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 1,191 patients completed CPASS-7 at a median of 560 days following the diagnosis of advanced cancer. Of these patients, 49% were concerned that they could not do the things they wanted; 35% reported decreased performance status. Financial toxicity was reported by 39% of patients, with family burdens noted in 25%. Although depression was reported by 15%, 43% reported lack of pleasure. Pain was reported by 33%. The median CPASS-7 total symptom burden score was 16 (possible 0-112). With a median follow-up of 15 months from initial survey, 46% had died. Patients with symptom burden scores <29 and ≥29 had a 6-month overall survival rate of 87% and 67%, respectively, and 12-month survival rates of 72% and 50%. A one-point score increase resulted in a 1.8% increase in expected hazard. CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced cancer with higher levels of symptom burden, as self-reported on the CPASS-7, had inferior survival. The PRO facilitates identification of patients appropriate for reassessment of treatment goals and potentially palliative and end-of-life care in response to symptom burden concerns. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A seven-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument was administered to 1,191 patients with advanced cancers. Patients self-reporting higher levels of physical and psychological symptom burden had inferior overall survival rates. High individual item symptom PRO responses should serve as a useful trigger to initiate supportive interventions, but when scores indicate global problems, discussions regarding end-of-life care might be appropriate.

High Gleason grade carcinoma at a positive surgical margin predicts biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy and may guide adjuvant radiotherapy.

UNLABELLED: Study Type - Prognosis (case series) Level of Evidence 4 What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Only 30-35% of patients with positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy develop recurrent disease. Adjuvant radiotherapy reduces the rate of biochemical relapse or metastasis and improves overall survival after radical prostatectomy. Various pathological factors, such as location and extent of positive margins, have been proposed as possible prognostic factors in men with margin-positive prostate cancer, however, the recent International Society of Urological Pathology consensus meeting in Boston noted that there is limited data on the significance of Gleason grade of the carcinoma at a positive margin. The present study shows that the presence of high grade prostate cancer, i.e. Gleason pattern 4 or 5, at a positive surgical margin is an independent predictor of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Moreover, patients with lower grade carcinoma at the margin have a similar prognosis to men with negative margins. Hence, assessment of Gleason grade at the site of positive margin may aid optimal selection of patients for adjuvant radiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: • To establish predictors of biochemical recurrence by analysing the pathological characteristics of positive surgical margins (PSMs), including Gleason grade of the carcinoma at the involved margin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Clinicopathological and outcome data on 940 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1997 and 2003 were collected. • Of these, 285 (30.3%) patients with PSMs were identified for pathological review, including assessment of location of margin, linear extent, number of PSMs, plane of margin and Gleason grade (3 vs 4 or 5) at the margin. RESULTS: • At a median follow-up of 82 months, the biochemical recurrence rate of the PSM cohort was 29%. • On univariate analysis, the presence of Gleason grade 4 or 5 at the margin (34.4% of cases) was significantly associated with biochemical recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 2.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]= 1.82-4.32, P < 0.001) compared with the presence of Gleason grade 3. • Linear extent of margin involvement was also associated with recurrence (P= 0.009). • Single vs multiple margin involvement, location, and plane of the involved margin were not significant predictors of recurrence. • On multivariate analysis, Gleason grade 4 or 5 at the margin remained an independent predictor of recurrence (HR 2.14, 95% CI = 1.29-4.03, P= 0.003). CONCLUSION: • The Gleason grade at the site of a PSM identifies patients at increased risk of biochemical recurrence and should aid stratification of patients for adjuvant radiation therapy.

Low AZGP1 expression predicts for recurrence in margin-positive, localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Men with positive margins after radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized prostate cancer (PC) have a 40-50% biochemical relapse rate at 5 years. Adjuvant radiotherapy improves biochemical progression-free and overall survival in men with positive margins, but is associated with increased toxicity. There is an urgent need to identify new prognostic markers to define the group of patients who would benefit from multimodality therapy. METHODS: Nuclear ß-catenin, membranous secreted frizzled-related protein 4 (sFRP4), zinc-alpha 2-glycoprotein (AZGP1), and macrophage inhibitory cytokine-1 (MIC-1) have previously been identified as molecular markers of outcome in localized PC. From these published studies, we identified a subset of patients with positive margins. The aim of this study was to assess the association between these four molecular markers and outcome in men with margin-positive, localized PC. RESULTS: We identified 186 men with positive margins from 330 men with localized PC; 53% had preoperative PSA >10 ng/ml, 72% extraprostatic extension (EPE), 24% seminal vesicles involvement (SVI), and 57% RP Gleason score ≥ 7. AZGP1 (P = 0.009), membranous sFRP4 (P = 0.03) and MIC-1 (P = 0.04) expression predicted for biochemical relapse on univariate analysis. Only absent/low AZGP1 expression (P = 0.01) was an independent predictor of recurrence in margin-positive, localized PC when modeled with preoperative PSA (P = 0.2), EPE (P = 0.2), SVI (P = 0.4), Gleason score ≥ 7 (P = 0.5) and adjuvant treatment (P = 0.4). Furthermore, there was an association between absent/low AZGP1 expression and clinical recurrence (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: AZGP1 is a potential molecular marker for biochemical relapse in men with margin-positive, localized PC. Routine assessment of this biomarker may lead to better selection of patients who will benefit from post-RP radiotherapy.

Cyclin D1 splice variants: polymorphism, risk, and isoform-specific regulation in prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Alternative CCND1 splicing results in cyclin D1b, which has specialized, protumorigenic functions in prostate not shared by the cyclin D1a (full length) isoform. Here, the frequency, tumor relevance, and mechanisms controlling cyclin D1b were challenged. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: First, relative expression of both cyclin D1 isoforms was determined in prostate adenocarcinomas. Second, relevance of the androgen axis was determined. Third, minigenes were created to interrogate the role of the G/A870 polymorphism (within the splice site), and findings were validated in primary tissue. Fourth, the effect of G/A870 on cancer risk was assessed in two large case-control studies. RESULTS: Cyclin D1b is induced in tumors, and a significant subset expressed this isoform in the absence of detectable cyclin D1a. Accordingly, the isoforms showed noncorrelated expression patterns, and hormone status did not alter splicing. Whereas G/A870 was not independently predictive of cancer risk, A870 predisposed for transcript-b production in cells and in normal prostate. The influence of A870 on overall transcript-b levels was relieved in tumors, indicating that aberrations in tumorigenesis likely alter the influence of the polymorphism. CONCLUSIONS: These studies reveal that cyclin D1b is specifically elevated in prostate tumorigenesis. Cyclin D1b expression patterns are distinct from that observed with cyclin D1a. The A870 allele predisposes for transcript-b production in a context-specific manner. Although A870 does not independently predict cancer risk, tumor cells can bypass the influence of the polymorphism. These findings have major implications for the analyses of D-cyclin function in the prostate and provide the foundation for future studies directed at identifying potential modifiers of the G/A870 polymorphism.