Genomic characterization of metastatic patterns from prospective clinical sequencing of 25,000 patients.

Metastatic progression is the main cause of death in cancer patients, whereas the underlying genomic mechanisms driving metastasis remain largely unknown. Here, we assembled MSK-MET, a pan-cancer cohort of over 25,000 patients with metastatic diseases. By analyzing genomic and clinical data from this cohort, we identified associations between genomic alterations and patterns of metastatic dissemination across 50 tumor types. We found that chromosomal instability is strongly correlated with metastatic burden in some tumor types, including prostate adenocarcinoma, lung adenocarcinoma, and HR+/HER2+ breast ductal carcinoma, but not in others, including colorectal cancer and high-grade serous ovarian cancer, where copy-number alteration patterns may be established early in tumor development. We also identified somatic alterations associated with metastatic burden and specific target organs. Our data offer a valuable resource for the investigation of the biological basis for metastatic spread and highlight the complex role of chromosomal instability in cancer progression.

Integrative clinical genomics of advanced prostate cancer.

Toward development of a precision medicine framework for metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), we established a multi-institutional clinical sequencing infrastructure to conduct prospective whole-exome and transcriptome sequencing of bone or soft tissue tumor biopsies from a cohort of 150 mCRPC affected individuals. Aberrations of AR, ETS genes, TP53, and PTEN were frequent (40%-60% of cases), with TP53 and AR alterations enriched in mCRPC compared to primary prostate cancer. We identified new genomic alterations in PIK3CA/B, R-spondin, BRAF/RAF1, APC, ß-catenin, and ZBTB16/PLZF. Moreover, aberrations of BRCA2, BRCA1, and ATM were observed at substantially higher frequencies (19.3% overall) compared to those in primary prostate cancers. 89% of affected individuals harbored a clinically actionable aberration, including 62.7% with aberrations in AR, 65% in other cancer-related genes, and 8% with actionable pathogenic germline alterations. This cohort study provides clinically actionable information that could impact treatment decisions for these affected individuals.

RAD21 promotes oncogenesis and lethal progression of prostate cancer.

Higher levels of aneuploidy, characterized by imbalanced chromosome numbers, are associated with lethal progression in prostate cancer. However, how aneuploidy contributes to prostate cancer aggressiveness remains poorly understood. In this study, we assessed in patients which genes on chromosome 8q, one of the most frequently gained chromosome arms in prostate tumors, were most strongly associated with long-term risk of cancer progression to metastases and death from prostate cancer (lethal disease) in 403 patients and found the strongest candidate was cohesin subunit gene, RAD21, with an odds ratio of 3.7 (95% CI 1.8, 7.6) comparing the highest vs. lowest tertiles of mRNA expression and adjusting for overall aneuploidy burden and Gleason score, both strong prognostic factors in primary prostate cancer. Studying prostate cancer driven by the TMPRSS2-ERG oncogenic fusion, found in about half of all prostate tumors, we found that increased RAD21 alleviated toxic oncogenic stress and DNA damage caused by oncogene expression. Data from both organoids and patients indicate that increased RAD21 thereby enables aggressive tumors to sustain tumor proliferation, and more broadly suggests one path through which tumors benefit from aneuploidy.

Rucaparib or Physician's Choice in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 2 study, rucaparib, an inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), showed a high level of activity in patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA alteration. Data are needed to confirm and expand on the findings of the phase 2 study. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration and who had disease progression after treatment with a second-generation androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI). We randomly assigned the patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or a physician's choice control (docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI [abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide]). The primary outcome was the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival according to independent review. RESULTS: Of the 4855 patients who had undergone prescreening or screening, 270 were assigned to receive rucaparib and 135 to receive a control medication (intention-to-treat population); in the two groups, 201 patients and 101 patients, respectively, had a BRCA alteration. At 62 months, the duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer in the rucaparib group than in the control group, both in the BRCA subgroup (median, 11.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.69) and in the intention-to-treat group (median, 10.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001 for both comparisons). In an exploratory analysis in the ATM subgroup, the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was 8.1 months in the rucaparib group and 6.8 months in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.52). The most frequent adverse events with rucaparib were fatigue and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: The duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer with rucaparib than with a control medication among patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA alteration. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; TRITON3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02975934.).

Author Correction: Tumour lineage shapes BRCA-mediated phenotypes.

An Amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Tumour lineage shapes BRCA-mediated phenotypes.

Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose individuals to certain cancers1-3, and disease-specific screening and preventative strategies have reduced cancer mortality in affected patients4,5. These classical tumour-suppressor genes have tumorigenic effects associated with somatic biallelic inactivation, although haploinsufficiency may also promote the formation and progression of tumours6,7. Moreover, BRCA1/2-mutant tumours are often deficient in the repair of double-stranded DNA breaks by homologous recombination8-13, and consequently exhibit increased therapeutic sensitivity to platinum-containing therapy and inhibitors of poly-(ADP-ribose)-polymerase (PARP)14,15. However, the phenotypic and therapeutic relevance of mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 remains poorly defined in most cancer types. Here we show that in the 2.7% and 1.8% of patients with advanced-stage cancer and germline pathogenic or somatic loss-of-function alterations in BRCA1/2, respectively, selective pressure for biallelic inactivation, zygosity-dependent phenotype penetrance, and sensitivity to PARP inhibition were observed only in tumour types associated with increased heritable cancer risk in BRCA1/2 carriers (BRCA-associated cancer types). Conversely, among patients with non-BRCA-associated cancer types, most carriers of these BRCA1/2 mutation types had evidence for tumour pathogenesis that was independent of mutant BRCA1/2. Overall, mutant BRCA is an indispensable founding event for some tumours, but in a considerable proportion of other cancers, it appears to be biologically neutral-a difference predominantly conditioned by tumour lineage-with implications for disease pathogenesis, screening, design of clinical trials and therapeutic decision-making.

Phase 1b study of enzalutamide plus CC-115, a dual mTORC1/2 and DNA-PK inhibitor, in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

BACKGROUND: CC-115, a dual mTORC1/2 and DNA-PK inhibitor, has promising antitumour activity when combined with androgen receptor (AR) inhibition in pre-clinical models. METHODS: Phase 1b multicentre trial evaluating enzalutamide with escalating doses of CC-115 in AR inhibitor-naive mCRPC patients (n = 41). Primary endpoints were safety and RP2D. Secondary endpoints included PSA response, time-to-PSA progression, and radiographic progression. RESULTS: Common adverse effects included rash (31.7% Grades 1-2 (Gr); 31.7% Gr 3), pruritis (43.9% Gr 1-2), diarrhoea (37% Gr 1-2), and hypertension (17% Gr 1-2; 9.8% Gr 3). CC-115 RP2D was 5 mg twice a day. In 40 evaluable patients, 80% achieved ≥50% reduction in PSA (PSA50), and 58% achieved ≥90% reduction in PSA (PSA90) by 12 weeks. Median time-to-PSA progression was 14.7 months and median rPFS was 22.1 months. Stratification by PI3K alterations demonstrated a non-statistically significant trend towards improved PSA50 response (PSA50 of 94% vs. 67%, p = 0.08). Exploratory pre-clinical analysis suggested CC-115 inhibited mTOR pathway strongly, but may be insufficient to inhibit DNA-PK at RP2D. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of enzalutamide and CC-115 was well tolerated. A non-statistically significant trend towards improved PSA response was observed in patients harbouring PI3K pathway alterations, suggesting potential predictive biomarkers of response to a PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway inhibitor. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02833883.

Clinical Impact of a Rapid Genetic Testing Model for Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Genetic testing may alter clinical management for individuals with metastatic prostate cancer by identifying additional therapies. Traditional counseling models are unlikely to enable time-sensitive therapeutic decision-making. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and clinical impact of an alternative hereditary genetic testing model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of a multicenter, single-arm prospective trial, individuals with advanced prostate cancer were referred by their oncologist for testing of 14 genes associated with hereditary prostate cancer. Pretest education (brochure and video) was provided in the oncology clinic. Questionnaires assessing participant satisfaction with both pretest education and decision to undergo genetic testing were collected. A genetic counselor contacted participants by phone to obtain family history and discuss results. Medical records were queried to determine whether a change in clinical management was discussed. RESULTS: Of 501 participants consented to germline analysis, 51 (10.2%) had at least 1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant. Change in treatment was discussed with 22/48 (45.8%) of eligible participants who tested positive. Feasibility of this model was assessed by participant satisfaction and turnaround time. Average±SD satisfaction with the pretest education (15.5±2.2, 4-20 scale) and with the decision to undergo genetic testing (17.1±2.9, 4-20 scale) were both high. Results were returned 20 days (median) after sample collection. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist-initiated germline genetic testing in collaboration with a genetic counselor is a feasible approach to testing advanced prostate cancer patients with impactful clinical actionability. The testing model and educational material serve as resources to clinicians treating prostate cancer patients.

ERF mutations reveal a balance of ETS factors controlling prostate oncogenesis.

Half of all prostate cancers are caused by the TMPRSS2-ERG gene-fusion, which enables androgens to drive expression of the normally silent E26 transformation-specific (ETS) transcription factor ERG in prostate cells. Recent genomic landscape studies of such cancers have reported recurrent point mutations and focal deletions of another ETS member, the ETS2 repressor factor ERF. Here we show these ERF mutations cause decreased protein stability and mostly occur in tumours without ERG upregulation. ERF loss recapitulates the morphological and phenotypic features of ERG gain in normal mouse prostate cells, including expansion of the androgen receptor transcriptional repertoire, and ERF has tumour suppressor activity in the same genetic background of Pten loss that yields oncogenic activity by ERG. In the more common scenario of ERG upregulation, chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by sequencing indicates that ERG inhibits the ability of ERF to bind DNA at consensus ETS sites both in normal and in cancerous prostate cells. Consistent with a competition model, ERF overexpression blocks ERG-dependent tumour growth, and ERF loss rescues TMPRSS2-ERG-positive prostate cancer cells from ERG dependency. Collectively, these data provide evidence that the oncogenicity of ERG is mediated, in part, by competition with ERF and they raise the larger question of whether other gain-of-function oncogenic transcription factors might also inactivate endogenous tumour suppressors.

Clinical annotations for prostate cancer research: Defining data elements, creating a reproducible analytical pipeline, and assessing data quality.

BACKGROUND: Routine clinical data from clinical charts are indispensable for retrospective and prospective observational studies and clinical trials. Their reproducibility is often not assessed. We developed a prostate cancer-specific database for clinical annotations and evaluated data reproducibility. METHODS: For men with prostate cancer who had clinical-grade paired tumor-normal sequencing at a comprehensive cancer center, we performed team-based retrospective data collection from the electronic medical record using a defined source hierarchy. We developed an open-source R package for data processing. With blinded repeat annotation by a reference medical oncologist, we assessed data completeness, reproducibility of team-based annotations, and impact of measurement error on bias in survival analyses. RESULTS: Data elements on demographics, diagnosis and staging, disease state at the time of procuring a genomically characterized sample, and clinical outcomes were piloted and then abstracted for 2261 patients (with 2631 samples). Completeness of data elements was generally high. Comparing to the repeat annotation by a medical oncologist blinded to the database (100 patients/samples), reproducibility of annotations was high; T stage, metastasis date, and presence and date of castration resistance had lower reproducibility. Impact of measurement error on estimates for strong prognostic factors was modest. CONCLUSIONS: With a prostate cancer-specific data dictionary and quality control measures, manual clinical annotations by a multidisciplinary team can be scalable and reproducible. The data dictionary and the R package for reproducible data processing are freely available to increase data quality and efficiency in clinical prostate cancer research.

Genomic correlates of clinical outcome in advanced prostate cancer.

Heterogeneity in the genomic landscape of metastatic prostate cancer has become apparent through several comprehensive profiling efforts, but little is known about the impact of this heterogeneity on clinical outcome. Here, we report comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic analysis of 429 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) linked with longitudinal clinical outcomes, integrating findings from whole-exome, transcriptome, and histologic analysis. For 128 patients treated with a first-line next-generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI; abiraterone or enzalutamide), we examined the association of 18 recurrent DNA- and RNA-based genomic alterations, including androgen receptor (AR) variant expression, AR transcriptional output, and neuroendocrine expression signatures, with clinical outcomes. Of these, only RB1 alteration was significantly associated with poor survival, whereas alterations in RB1, AR, and TP53 were associated with shorter time on treatment with an ARSI. This large analysis integrating mCRPC genomics with histology and clinical outcomes identifies RB1 genomic alteration as a potent predictor of poor outcome, and is a community resource for further interrogation of clinical and molecular associations.

Inherited DNA-Repair Gene Mutations in Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Inherited mutations in DNA-repair genes such as BRCA2 are associated with increased risks of lethal prostate cancer. Although the prevalence of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with localized prostate cancer who are unselected for family predisposition is insufficient to warrant routine testing, the frequency of such mutations in patients with metastatic prostate cancer has not been established. METHODS: We recruited 692 men with documented metastatic prostate cancer who were unselected for family history of cancer or age at diagnosis. We isolated germline DNA and used multiplex sequencing assays to assess mutations in 20 DNA-repair genes associated with autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndromes. RESULTS: A total of 84 germline DNA-repair gene mutations that were presumed to be deleterious were identified in 82 men (11.8%); mutations were found in 16 genes, including BRCA2 (37 men [5.3%]), ATM (11 [1.6%]), CHEK2 (10 [1.9% of 534 men with data]), BRCA1 (6 [0.9%]), RAD51D (3 [0.4%]), and PALB2 (3 [0.4%]). Mutation frequencies did not differ according to whether a family history of prostate cancer was present or according to age at diagnosis. Overall, the frequency of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic prostate cancer significantly exceeded the prevalence of 4.6% among 499 men with localized prostate cancer (P<0.001), including men with high-risk disease, and the prevalence of 2.7% in the Exome Aggregation Consortium, which includes 53,105 persons without a known cancer diagnosis (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our multicenter study, the incidence of germline mutations in genes mediating DNA-repair processes among men with metastatic prostate cancer was 11.8%, which was significantly higher than the incidence among men with localized prostate cancer. The frequencies of germline mutations in DNA-repair genes among men with metastatic disease did not differ significantly according to age at diagnosis or family history of prostate cancer. (Funded by Stand Up To Cancer and others.).

Beyond the androgen receptor II: New approaches to understanding and treating metastatic prostate cancer; Report from the 2017 Coffey-Holden Prostate Cancer Academy Meeting.

INTRODUCTION: The 2017 Coffey-Holden Prostate Cancer Academy (CHPCA) Meeting, "Beyond the Androgen Receptor II: New Approaches to Understanding and Treating Metastatic Prostate Cancer," was held in Carlsbad, California from June 14-17, 2017. METHODS: The CHPCA is an annual scientific conference hosted by the Prostate Cancer Foundation (PCF) that is uniquely designed to produce extensive and constructive discussions on the most urgent and impactful topics concerning research into the biology and treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. The 2017 CHPCA Meeting was the 5th meeting in this annual series and was attended by 71 investigators focused on prostate cancer and a variety of other fields including breast and ovarian cancer. RESULTS: The discussions at the meeting were concentrated on topics areas including: mechanisms and therapeutic approaches for molecular subclasses of castrate resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), the epigenetic landscape of prostate cancer, the role of DNA repair gene mutations, advancing the use of germline genetics in clinical practice, radionuclides for imaging and therapy, advances in molecular imaging, and therapeutic strategies for successful use of immunotherapy in advanced prostate cancer. DISCUSSION: This article reviews the presentations and discussions from the 2017 CHPCA Meeting in order to disseminate this knowledge and accelerate new biological understandings and advances in the treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

A phase 1b dose expansion study of the pan-class I PI3K inhibitor buparlisib (BKM120) plus carboplatin and paclitaxel in PTEN deficient tumors and with dose intensified carboplatin and paclitaxel.

Purpose We previously reported the phase I dose escalation study of buparlisib, a pan-class 1A PI3K inhibitor, combined with platinum/taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors. The combination was well tolerated and promising preliminary efficacy was observed in PTEN deficient tumors. This phase I dose expansion study now evaluates buparlisib plus high dose carboplatin and paclitaxel in unselected patients with advanced solid tumors and buparlisib plus standard dose carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with PTEN deficient tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01297452). Methods There were two expansion cohorts: Cohort A received continuous buparlisib (100 mg/daily) orally plus high dose carboplatin AUC 6 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2; Cohort B treated patients with PTEN deficient tumors only and they received the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of continuous buparlisib (100 mg/daily) orally plus standard dose carboplatin AUC 5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2. Both cohorts received chemotherapy intravenously on day 1 of the 21-day cycle with pegfilgrastim support. Primary endpoint in Cohort A was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of chemotherapy dose intensification with buparlisib and in Cohort B was to describe preliminary efficacy of the combination among patients with tumors harboring a PTEN mutation or homozygous deletion. Results 14 subjects were enrolled, 7 in Cohort A and 7 in Cohort B. Dose reductions were required in 5 (71%) and 3 (43%) patients, in cohort A and B respectively. Grade 3 adverse events in Cohort A included lymphopenia (n = 5 [71%]), hyperglycemia (n = 2, [29%]), diarrhea (n = 2, [29%]) and rash (n = 2, [29%]) and in cohort B included lymphopenia (n = 5 [71%]), hyperglycemia (n = 4 [57%]) and neutropenia (n = 2 [29%]. The mean number of cycles on protocol was 6. The overall objective response rate was 14% (2 /14). No objective responses were observed in the PTEN deficient cohort. Four out of 6 patients with stable disease (SD) had SD or better for ≥6 cycles, 2 of which had PTEN deficient tumors. Conclusion The addition of buparlisib to high dose carboplatin and paclitaxel was not tolerable. The combination did not reveal significant clinical activity amongst a small and heterogenous group of PTEN deficient tumors.

Mutation Detection in Patients With Advanced Cancer by Universal Sequencing of Cancer-Related Genes in Tumor and Normal DNA vs Guideline-Based Germline Testing.

Importance: Guidelines for cancer genetic testing based on family history may miss clinically actionable genetic changes with established implications for cancer screening or prevention. Objective: To determine the proportion and potential clinical implications of inherited variants detected using simultaneous sequencing of the tumor and normal tissue ("tumor-normal sequencing") compared with genetic test results based on current guidelines. Design, Setting, and Participants: From January 2014 until May 2016 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 10 336 patients consented to tumor DNA sequencing. Since May 2015, 1040 of these patients with advanced cancer were referred by their oncologists for germline analysis of 76 cancer predisposition genes. Patients with clinically actionable inherited mutations whose genetic test results would not have been predicted by published decision rules were identified. Follow-up for potential clinical implications of mutation detection was through May 2017. Exposure: Tumor and germline sequencing compared with the predicted yield of targeted germline sequencing based on clinical guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of clinically actionable germline mutations detected by universal tumor-normal sequencing that would not have been detected by guideline-directed testing. Results: Of 1040 patients, the median age was 58 years (interquartile range, 50.5-66 years), 65.3% were male, and 81.3% had stage IV disease at the time of genomic analysis, with prostate, renal, pancreatic, breast, and colon cancer as the most common diagnoses. Of the 1040 patients, 182 (17.5%; 95% CI, 15.3%-19.9%) had clinically actionable mutations conferring cancer susceptibility, including 149 with moderate- to high-penetrance mutations; 101 patients tested (9.7%; 95% CI, 8.1%-11.7%) would not have had these mutations detected using clinical guidelines, including 65 with moderate- to high-penetrance mutations. Frequency of inherited mutations was related to case mix, stage, and founder mutations. Germline findings led to discussion or initiation of change to targeted therapy in 38 patients tested (3.7%) and predictive testing in the families of 13 individuals (1.3%), including 6 for whom genetic evaluation would not have been initiated by guideline-based testing. Conclusions and Relevance: In this referral population with selected advanced cancers, universal sequencing of a broad panel of cancer-related genes in paired germline and tumor DNA samples was associated with increased detection of individuals with potentially clinically significant heritable mutations over the predicted yield of targeted germline testing based on current clinical guidelines. Knowledge of these additional mutations can help guide therapeutic and preventive interventions, but whether all of these interventions would improve outcomes for patients with cancer or their family members requires further study. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01775072.

Therapeutic implications of homologous repair deficiency testing in patients with prostate cancer (Part 2 of 2).

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Unfortunately, not all metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receive available life-prolonging systemic therapies, emphasizing the need to optimize mCRPC treatment selections. Better guidelines are necessary to determine genetic testing for prostate cancer. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In this two-part expert opinion-based guide, we provide an expert consensus opinion on the utilization of germline and somatic testing to detect HRR alterations in patients with mCRPC. This guide was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel that convened in 2023-2024, including representatives from medical oncology, urology, radiation oncology, pathology, medical genomics, and basic science. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: In this second part, we highlight how genetic testing can lead to improved, life-prolonging mCRPC therapeutic strategies based on a review of the recent phase III trials and subsequent regulatory approvals for PARP inhibitors in mCRPC.

Germline and somatic testing for homologous repair deficiency in patients with prostate cancer (part 1 of 2).

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Unfortunately, not all metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients receive available life-prolonging systemic therapies, emphasizing the need to optimize mCRPC treatment selections. Better guidelines are necessary to determine genetic testing in prostate cancer. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In this two-part expert opinion-based guide, we provide an expert consensus opinion on the utilization of germline and somatic testing to detect HRR alterations in patients with mCRPC. This guide was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel that convened in 2023-2024, including representatives from medical oncology, urology, radiation oncology, pathology, medical genomics, and basic science. RESULTS/CONCLUSION: We argue for the widespread adoption of germline testing in all patients with prostate cancer and for somatic mutations testing in patients at the time of recurrent/metastatic disease. In this first part, we review how genomic testing is performed. We also review how to overcome certain barriers to integrate genetic and biomarker testing into clinical practice.

Germline DNA damage repair variants and prognosis of patients with high-risk or metastatic prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Deleterious germline variants in certain DNA repair genes are risk factors for developing aggressive prostate cancer. The objective was to quantify their prognostic impact after prostate cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Men with prostate cancer, predominantly of European ancestry, were included from four cohorts with long-term follow-up. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants in 26 DNA repair genes were assessed in relation to metastasis-free survival in high-risk, localized prostate cancer and to overall survival in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). RESULTS: Among 3,525 patients initially diagnosed with non-metastatic prostate cancer, 2,594 had high-risk localized prostate cancer, 429 mCSPC, and 502 mCRPC at inclusion. BRCA2 variant carriers did not have worse metastasis-free survival in high-risk localized prostate cancer (hazard ratio [HR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69, 1.46) or overall survival in mCSPC (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.14, 1.45) or mCRPC (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.31, 1.17) compared to non-carriers of DNA repair variants. Among 868 additional patients with de novo metastatic (M1) prostate cancer, BRCA2 variant carriers tended to have worse overall survival (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.01, 2.51). BRCA2 prognostic associations were not explained by radiation, PARP inhibitor, or platinum therapy. Results for other genes were limited in precision because variants were less common. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with high-risk or metastatic prostate cancer who were initially diagnosed with and treated for non-metastatic tumors, germline DNA repair variants in BRCA2 do not confer a substantially worse prognosis.