Molecular Hallmarks of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen in Treatment-naïve Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We characterized tumor prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) levels as a reflection of cancer biology and treatment sensitivities for treatment-naïve prostate cancer. METHODS: We first correlated PSMA positron emission tomography (PET) maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) in primary prostate cancer with tumor FOLH1 (PSMA RNA abundance) to establish RNA as a proxy (n = 55). We then discovered and validated molecular pathways associated with PSMA RNA levels in two large primary tumor cohorts. We validated those associations in independent cohorts (18 total; 5684 tumor samples) to characterize the pathways and treatment responses associated with PSMA. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: PSMA RNA abundance correlates moderately with SUVmax (ρ = 0.41). In independent cohorts, androgen receptor signaling is more active in tumors with high PSMA. Accordingly, patients with high PSMA tumors experienced longer cancer-specific survival when managed with androgen deprivation therapy for biochemical recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 0.54 [0.34-0.87]; n = 174). PSMA low tumors possess molecular markers of resistance to radiotherapy. Consistent with this, patients with high PSMA tumors experience longer time to recurrence following primary radiotherapy (AHR 0.50 [0.28-0.90]; n = 248). In the SAKK09/10 trial (n = 224), patients with high PSMA tumors who were managed with salvage radiotherapy experienced longer time to progression in the 64-Gy arm (restricted mean survival time [RMST] +7.60 [0.05-15.16]), but this effect was mitigated in the 70-Gy arm (RMST 3.52 [-3.30 to 10.33]). Limitations include using PSMA RNA as a surrogate for PET SUVmax. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: PSMA levels in treatment-naïve prostate cancer differentiate tumor biology and treatment susceptibilities. These results warrant validation using PET metrics to substantiate management decisions based on imaging.

Testosterone recovery after androgen deprivation therapy.

PURPOSE: Finite courses of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are often utilized in men undergoing treatment for prostate cancer. Previous evidence suggests that timing of testosterone (T) recovery can be variable after ADT. Recently, an oral gonadotropin releasing-hormone (GnRH) antagonist, relugolix, has demonstrated more rapid T recovery than injectable GnRH agonists such as leuprolide. In this study, we sought to evaluate patient characteristics associated with T recovery in patients undergoing ADT of defined duration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Northwestern Enterprise Data Warehouse was queried for men with prostate cancer who completed a course of ADT and subsequently had a testosterone lab performed. Testosterone recovery was evaluated for levels that reached above castrate (T > 50 ng/dl), partial recovery (T > 150 ng/dl), and full recovery (T ≥ 300 ng/dl). RESULTS: 388 men who received finite courses of ADT were identified (348 receiving leuprolide, 36 receiving relugolix, and 4 receiving degarelix). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, men who were prescribed GnRH antagonists (HR = 3.74, CI = 2.53-5.53, P ≤ 0.001) and who were younger (HR for 1 year increase in age = 0.96, CI = 0.95-0.98, P < 0.001) were more likely to achieve partial recovery. In a subgroup analysis, men who received extended ADT courses (>12 months) with a GnRH agonist had lower rates of partial T recovery (HR = 0.58, CI = 0.41-0.81, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: T recovery after ADT is variable with roughly one sixth of men remaining castrate. GnRH antagonist use and younger age are associated with higher rates of T recovery after ADT. Longer ADT courses were associated with worse T recovery rates.

Utility of dynamic contrast enhancement for clinically significant prostate cancer detection.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the association of dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, Gleason Grade Group ≥2) and compare biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) nomograms. Subjects/patients and methods: We identified a retrospective cohort of biopsy naïve patients who underwent pre-biopsy MRI separated by individual MRI series from 2018 to 2022. csPCa detection rates were calculated for patients with peripheral zone (PZ) lesions scored 3-5 on diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) with available DCE (annotated as - or +). bpMRI Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) (3 = 3-, 3+; 4 = 4-, 4+; 5 = 5-, 5+) and mpMRI PIRADS (3 = 3-; 4 = 3+, 4-, 4+; 5 = 5-, 5+) approaches were compared in multivariable logistic regression models. Nomograms for detection of csPCa and ≥GG3 PCa incorporating all biopsy naïve patients who underwent prostate MRI were generated based on available serum biomarkers [PHI, % free prostate-specific antigen (PSA), or total PSA] and validated with an independent cohort. Results: Patients (n = 1010) with highest PIRADS lesion in PZ were included in initial analysis with 127 (12.6%) classified as PIRADS 3+ (PIRADS 3 on bpMRI but PIRADS 4 on mpMRI). On multivariable analysis, PIRADS 3+ lesions were associated with higher csPCa rates compared to PIRADS 3- (3+ vs. 3-: OR 1.86, p = 0.024), but lower csPCa rates compared to PIRADS DWI 4 lesions (4 vs. 3+: OR 2.39, p < 0.001). csPCa rates were 19% (3-), 31% (3+), 41.5% (4-), 65.9% (4+), 62.5% (5-), and 92.3% (5+). bpMRI nomograms were non-inferior to mpMRI nomograms in the development (n = 1410) and independent validation (n = 353) cohorts. Risk calculators available at: https://rossnm1.shinyapps.io/MynMRIskCalculator/. Conclusion: While DCE positivity by itself was associated with csPCa among patients with highest PIRADS lesions in the PZ, nomogram comparisons suggest that there is no significant difference in performance of bpMRI and mpMRI. bpMRI may be considered as an alternative to mpMRI for prostate cancer evaluation in many situations.

Transperineal vs Transrectal Prostate Biopsy-The PREVENT Randomized Clinical Trial.

This randomized clinical trial compares the effect of transperineal vs transrectal prostate biopsy on infection rates after biopsy.

BRCA1, BRCA2, and Associated Cancer Risks and Management for Male Patients: A Review.

Importance: Half of all carriers of inherited cancer-predisposing variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are male, but the implications for their health are underrecognized compared to female individuals. Germline variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (also known as pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, referred to here as BRCA1/2 PVs) are well known to significantly increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancers in female carriers, and knowledge of BRCA1/2 PVs informs established cancer screening and options for risk reduction. While risks to male carriers of BRCA1/2 PVs are less characterized, there is convincing evidence of increased risk for prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast cancer in males. There has also been a rapid expansion of US Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted cancer therapies, including poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, for breast, pancreatic, and prostate cancers associated with BRCA1/2 PVs. Observations: This narrative review summarized the data that inform cancer risks, targeted cancer therapy options, and guidelines for early cancer detection. It also highlighted areas of emerging research and clinical trial opportunities for male BRCA1/2 PV carriers. These developments, along with the continued relevance to family cancer risk and reproductive options, have informed changes to guideline recommendations for genetic testing and strengthened the case for increased genetic testing for males. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite increasing clinical actionability for male carriers of BRCA1/2 PVs, far fewer males than female individuals undergo cancer genetic testing. Oncologists, internists, and primary care clinicians should be vigilant about offering appropriate genetic testing to males. Identifying more male carriers of BRCA1/2 PVs will maximize opportunities for cancer early detection, targeted risk management, and cancer treatment for males, along with facilitating opportunities for risk reduction and prevention in their family members, thereby decreasing the burden of hereditary cancer.

Use of Decipher Prostate Biopsy Test in Patients with Favorable-risk Disease Undergoing Conservative Management or Radical Prostatectomy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The extent of prostate cancer found on biopsy, as well as prostate cancer grade and genomic tests, can affect clinical decision-making. The impact of these factors on the initial management approach and subsequent patient outcomes for men with favorable-grade prostate cancer has not yet been determined on a population level. Our objective was to explore the association of Decipher 22-gene genomic classifier (GC) biopsy testing on the initial use of conservative management versus radical prostatectomy (RP) and to determine the independent effect of GC scores on RP pathologic outcomes. METHODS: A total of 87 140 patients diagnosed with grade group 1 and 2 prostate cancer between 2016 and 2018 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data were linked to GC testing results (2576 tested and 84 564 untested with a GC). The primary endpoints of interest were receipt of conservative management or RP, pathologic upgrading (pathologic grade group 3-5), upstaging (pathologic ≥T3b), and adverse pathologic features (pathologic upgrading, upstaging, or lymph node invasion). Multivariable logistic regressions quantified the association of variables with outcomes of interest. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: GC tested patients were more likely to have grade group 2 on biopsy (51% vs 46%, p < 0.001) and lower prostate-specific antigen (6.1 vs 6.3, p = 0.016). Conservative management increased from 37% to 39% and from 22% to 24% during 2016-2018 for the GC tested and untested populations, respectively. GC testing was significantly associated with increased odds of conservative management (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-2.4, p < 0.001). The distribution of biopsy GC risk was as follows: 45% low risk, 30% intermediate risk, and 25% high risk. In adjusted analyses, higher GC (per 0.1 increment) scores (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17-1.31, p < 0.001) and percent positive cores (1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12, p = 0.009) were significantly associated with the receipt of RP. A higher GC score was significantly associated with all adverse outcomes (pathologic upgrading [OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.49, p < 0.001], upstaging [OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.05-1.62, p = 0.020], and adverse pathology [OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12-1.45, p < 0.001]). Limitations include observational biases associated with the retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Men who underwent GC testing were more likely to undergo conservative management. GC testing at biopsy is prognostic of adverse pathologic outcomes in a large population-based registry. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this population analysis of men with favorable-risk prostate cancer, those who underwent genomic testing at biopsy were more likely to undergo conservative management. Of men who initially underwent radical prostatectomy, higher genomic risk but not tumor volume was associated with adverse pathologic outcomes. The use of genomic testing at prostate biopsy improves risk stratification and may better inform treatment decisions than the use of tumor volume alone.

Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer following initial omission of biopsy in multiparametric MRI era.

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) is being increasingly adopted for work-up of prostate cancer. For patients selected to omit biopsy, we identified factors associated with repeat MRI, eventual prostate biopsy, and subsequent detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, Grade Group ≥2). METHODS: We identified biopsy-naïve men presenting with PSA 2-20 ng/mL (March 2018-June 2021) undergoing initial mpMRI with PIRADS 1-3 lesions who were not selected for biopsy with ≥6 months follow-up. We examined factors associated with repeat mpMRI, progression to biopsy, and subsequent detection of csPCa with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 1494 men, 31% (463/1494) did not pursue biopsy. PSA density (PSAD) ≤ 0.1, prostate health index (PHI) < 55, and PIRADS 1-2 were associated with omission of prostate biopsy. csPCa diagnosis-free survival was 97.6% (326/334) with median follow up of 23.1 months (IQR 15.1-34.6 months). Black race, PSA, PHI, PSA density, and PSA and PHI velocity were significant predictors of undergoing repeat mpMRI (15.6%, 52/334) and subsequent biopsy (8.4%, 28/334). 8 men were subsequently diagnosed with csPCa (N = 7 on prostate biopsy; N = 1 incidentally on holmium enucleation of prostate). All patients diagnosed with csPCa had PIRADS 4-5 on repeat mpMRI. CONCLUSIONS: The subsequent detection rate of csPCa among patients not initially biopsied after mpMRI was low at 2.4%. Decisions to omit biopsy after initial reassuring PHI, PSAD, and mpMRI appear safe with subsequent reassuring serum biomarkers and for cause mpMRI during follow-up.

Risk Stratification of Patients with Recurrence After Primary Treatment for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogeneous disease state. While BCR is associated with worse oncologic outcomes, risk factors that impact outcomes can vary significantly, necessitating avenues for risk stratification. We sought to identify prognostic risk factors at the time of recurrence after primary radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, and prior to salvage treatment(s), associated with adverse oncologic outcomes. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of prospective studies in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from January 1, 2000 to October 16, 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (CRD42023466330). We reviewed the factors associated with oncologic outcomes among patients with BCR after primary definitive treatment. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 37 studies were included (total n = 10 632), 25 after prostatectomy (total n = 9010) and 12 after radiotherapy (total n = 1622). Following recurrence after prostatectomy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include higher pathologic T stage and grade group, negative surgical margins, shorter prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT), higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) prior to salvage treatment, shorter time to recurrence, the 22-gene tumor RNA signature, and recurrence location on molecular imaging. After recurrence following radiotherapy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include a shorter time to recurrence, and shorter PSADT or higher PSA velocity. Grade group, T stage, and prior short-term hormone therapy (4-6 mo) were not clearly associated with adverse outcomes, although sample size and follow-up were generally limited compared with postprostatectomy data. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This work highlights the recommendations and level of evidence for risk stratifying patients with PCa recurrence, and can be used as a benchmark for personalizing salvage treatment based on prognostics.

Contemporary Diagnosis of Very Low-risk Prostate Cancer in a Multihospital Health Care System.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) very low risk (VLR) category for prostate cancer (PCa) represents clinically insignificant disease, and detection of VLR PCa contributes to overdiagnosis. Greater use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biomarkers before patient selection for prostate biopsy (PBx) reduces unnecessary biopsies and may reduce the diagnosis of clinically insignificant PCa. We tested a hypothesis that the proportion of VLR diagnoses has decreased with greater use of MRI-informed PBx using data from our 11-hospital system. From 2018 to 2023, 351/3197 (11%) men diagnosed with PCa met the NCCN VLR criteria. The proportion of VLR diagnoses did not change from 2018 to 2023 (p = 0.8) despite an increase in the use of MRI-informed PBx (from 49% to 82%; p < 0.001). Of patients who underwent combined systematic and targeted PBx and were diagnosed with VLR disease, cancer was found in systematic PBx regions in 79% of cases and in targeted PBx regions in 31% of cases. When performing both systematic and targeted PBx, prebiopsy MRI-based risk calculators could limit VLR diagnosis by 41% using a risk threshold of >5% for Gleason grade group ≥3 PCa to recommend biopsy; the reduction would be 77% if performing targeted PBx only. These findings suggest that VLR disease continues to account for a significant minority of PCa diagnoses and could be limited by targeted PBx and risk stratification calculators. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at recent trends for the diagnosis of very low-risk (VLR) prostate cancer. We found that VLR cancer still seems to be frequently diagnosed despite the use of MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scans before biopsy. The use of risk calculators to identify men who could avoid biopsy and/or biopsy only for lesions that are visible on MRI could reduce the overdiagnosis of VLR prostate cancer.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.

Transcriptome-Based Prognostic and Predictive Biomarker Analysis of ENACT: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Enzalutamide in Men Undergoing Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: Few studies have explored the potential for pharmacological interventions to delay disease progression in patients undergoing active surveillance (AS). This preplanned transcriptomic analysis of patient samples from the ENACT trial aims to identify biomarkers in patients on AS who are at increased risk for disease progression or who may derive the greatest benefit from enzalutamide treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase II ENACT (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02799745) trial, patients on AS were randomly assigned 1:1 to 160 mg orally once daily enzalutamide monotherapy or continued AS for 1 year. Transcriptional analyses were conducted on biopsies collected at trial screening, year 1, and year 2. Three gene expression signatures were evaluated in samples collected at screening and in available samples from patients on AS at any time during surveillance (expanded cohort): Decipher genomic classifier, androgen receptor activity (AR-A) score, and Prediction Analysis of Microarray 50 (PAM50) cell subtype signature. RESULTS: The Decipher genomic classifier score was prognostic; higher scores were associated with disease progression in the expanded cohort and AS arm of the expanded cohort. Patients with higher Decipher scores had greater positive treatment effect from enzalutamide as measured by time to secondary rise in prostate-specific antigen >25% above baseline. In patients treated with enzalutamide, higher AR-A scores and PAM50 luminal subtypes were associated with a greater likelihood of negative biopsy incidence at year 2. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that the Decipher genomic classifier may be prognostic for disease progression in AS patients with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Higher Decipher and AR-A scores, as well as PAM50 luminal subtypes, may also serve as biomarkers for treatment response.

Ultrasensitive PSA: rethinking post-surgical management for node positive prostate cancer.

Introduction: Clinicians may offer patients with positive lymph nodes (pN1) and undetectable PSA following surgery for prostate cancer either observation or adjuvant therapy based on AUA, EAU, and NCCN guidelines considering standard PSA detection thresholds of <0.1ng/ml. Here we sought to investigate the outcomes of pN1 patients in the era of ultrasensitive PSA testing. Methods: We queried the Northwestern Electronic Data Warehouse for patients with prostate cancer who were pN1 at radical prostatectomy and followed with ultrasensitive PSA. Patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. We compared clinical characteristics including age, race, pre-operative PSA, Gleason grade, tumor stage, surgical margins, and nodal specimens to identify factors associated with achievement and maintenance of an undetectable PSA (defined as <0.01 ng/mL). Statistics were performed using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-squared analysis, and logistic regression with significance defined as p<0.05. Results: From 2018-2023, 188 patients were included. Subsequently, 39 (20.7%) had a PSA decline to undetectable levels (<0.01 ng/mL) post-operatively at a median time of 63 days. Seven percent of these men (3/39) were treated with adjuvant RT + ADT with undetectable PSA levels. 13/39 (33.3%) had eventual rises in PSA to ≥0.01 ng/mL for which they underwent salvage RT with ADT. Overall, 23/39 (59%) patients achieved and maintained undetectable PSA levels without subsequent therapy at median follow-up of 24.2 mo. Compared to patients with PSA persistence after surgery or elevations to detectable levels (≥0.01 ng/mL), patients who achieved and maintained undetectable levels had lower Gleason grades (p=0.03), lower tumor stage (p<0.001), fewer positive margins (p=0.02), and fewer involved lymph nodes (p=0.02). On multivariable analysis, only primary tumor (pT) stage was associated with achieving and maintaining an undetectable PSA; pT3b disease was associated with a 6.6-fold increased chance of developing a detectable PSA (p=0.03). Conclusion: Ultrasensitive PSA can aid initiation of early salvage therapy for lymph node positive patients after radical prostatectomy while avoiding overtreatment in a significant subset. 20% of patients achieved an undetectable PSA and over half of this subset remained undetectable after 2 years.

External Validation of a Digital Pathology-based Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Architecture in the NRG/RTOG 9902 Phase 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Accurate risk stratification is critical to guide management decisions in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previously, we had developed and validated a multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) model generated from digital histopathology and clinical features. Here, we externally validate this model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the MMAI model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Our validation cohort included 318 localized high-risk PCa patients from NRG/RTOG 9902 with available histopathology (337 [85%] of the 397 patients enrolled into the trial had available slides, of which 19 [5.6%] failed due to poor image quality). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Two previously locked prognostic MMAI models were validated for their intended endpoint: distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM). Individual clinical factors and the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk features served as comparators. Subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was reported per standard deviation increase of the score with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using Fine-Gray or Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The DM and PCSM MMAI algorithms were significantly and independently associated with the risk of DM (sHR [95% CI] = 2.33 [1.60-3.38], p < 0.001) and PCSM, respectively (sHR [95% CI] = 3.54 [2.38-5.28], p < 0.001) when compared against other prognostic clinical factors and NCCN high-risk features. The lower 75% of patients by DM MMAI had estimated 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 4% and 7%, and the highest quartile had average 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 19% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for the PCSM MMAI algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: We externally validated the prognostic ability of MMAI models previously developed among men with localized high-risk disease. MMAI prognostic models further risk stratify beyond the clinical and pathological variables for DM and PCSM in a population of men already at a high risk for disease progression. This study provides evidence for consistent validation of our deep learning MMAI models to improve prognostication and enable more informed decision-making for patient care. PATIENT SUMMARY: This paper presents a novel approach using images from pathology slides along with clinical variables to validate artificial intelligence (computer-generated) prognostic models. When implemented, clinicians can offer a more personalized and tailored prognostic discussion for men with localized prostate cancer.

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Cognitive vs Software Fusion, A Multicenter Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinically significant prostate cancer detection with TP-TBx utilizing software vs cognitive fusion. It is established that MRI prior to prostate biopsy improves detection of clinically significant cancer (csPCa, Grade Group ≥2). MRI/US fusion targeted biopsy via a transperineal approach (TP-TBx) is increasing in utilization due to the clean percutaneous approach that greatly reduces postbiopsy infection. However, the comparative effectiveness of formal software fusion over cognitive fusion remains under studied. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study from June 2020 to July 2022 including age, race, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, PI-RADS, lesion size(s), number of cores sampled, indication (elevated PSA, prior negative, active surveillance) and anesthesia type. Surgeon preference determined use of cognitive (PrecisionPoint) vs software fusion techniques. Multivariable logistic regression determined factors associated with TP-TBx detection of csPCa. RESULTS: We identified 490 patients (201 cognitive, 289 software fusion) who underwent TP-TBx. Patient age, PSA, number of targets, and PI-RADS were similar (all P > .05). Software fusion TP-TBx had 4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3-5] more (estimated median difference) systematic cores sampled. csPCa was detected in 44% of all patients. In adjusted analysis, cognitive vs software fusion was similar in detection of csPCa (odds ratio 1.46, 95% CI 0.82-2.58). CONCLUSION: Cognitive vs software fusion TP-TBx has similar csPCa detection, despite fewer systematic cores taken with cognitive fusion. The expense, additional time requirement, and similar outcomes of software fusion platforms confers higher value to cognitive TP-Bx.

Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The transrectal biopsy approach is traditionally used to detect prostate cancer. An alternative transperineal approach is historically performed under general anesthesia, but recent advances enable transperineal biopsy to be performed under local anesthesia. We sought to compare infectious complications of transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis. METHODS: We assigned biopsy-naïve participants to undergo transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis (rectal culture screening for fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria and antibiotic targeting to culture and sensitivity results) through a multicenter, randomized trial. The primary outcome was post-biopsy infection captured by a prospective medical review and patient report on a 7-d survey. The secondary outcomes included cancer detection, noninfectious complications, and a numerical rating scale (0-10) for biopsy-related pain and discomfort during and 7-d after biopsy. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 658 participants were randomized, with zero transperineal versus four (1.4%) transrectal biopsy infections (difference -1.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.2%, 0.3%; p = 0.059). The rates of other complications were very low and similar. Importantly, detection of clinically significant cancer was similar (53% transperineal vs 50% transrectal, adjusted difference 2.0%; 95% CI -6.0, 10). Participants in the transperineal arm experienced worse periprocedural pain (0.6 adjusted difference [0-10 scale], 95% CI 0.2, 0.9), but the effect was small and resolved by 7-d. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Office-based transperineal biopsy is tolerable, does not compromise cancer detection, and did not result in infectious complications. Transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis achieved similar infection rates, but requires rectal cultures and careful attention to antibiotic selection and administration. Consideration of these factors and antibiotic stewardship should guide clinical decision-making. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this multicenter randomized trial, we compare prostate biopsy infectious complications for the transperineal versus transrectal approach. The absence of infectious complications with transperineal biopsy without the use of preventative antibiotics is noteworthy, but not significantly different from transrectal biopsy with targeted antibiotic prophylaxis.

Semi-Supervised, Attention-Based Deep Learning for Predicting TMPRSS2:ERG Fusion Status in Prostate Cancer Using Whole Slide Images.

IMPLICATIONS: Our study illuminates the potential of deep learning in effectively inferring key prostate cancer genetic alterations from the tissue morphology depicted in routinely available histology slides, offering a cost-effective method that could revolutionize diagnostic strategies in oncology.