Delayed graft function in kidney transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Delayed graft function (DGF) has several long-term graft implications in the field of kidney transplantation and remains a challenge. The incidence of DGF is on the rise because of an increasing use of marginal kidneys in an era of organ shortage. Risk factors for DGF are numerous and stem from multiple sources in the transplant chain starting from the donor to its final allocation in the recipient. There is no FDA-approved therapy for DGF, and several therapies are being studied to mitigate ischemic injury and prolong graft survival. RECENT FINDINGS: Published data from studies suggest that ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) and immune responses to transplants are the leading cause of DGF, which in turn is associated with an increased incidence in acute renal rejection. Several novel methods are being developed and are undergoing further clinical validation to prove as an effective therapy against DGF. SUMMARY: Recent studies have proposed several different mechanisms to mitigate ischemic injury to prevent acute renal injury, both of which are representative of DGF. New therapies must be effectively reviewed to ensure advancement of DGF prevention. A number of immunotherapies targeted towards inhibition of complement activation in addition to other novel therapies might prove promising towards mitigating DGF.

Molecular Analysis of Low Grade Prostate Cancer Using a Genomic Classifier of Metastatic Potential.

PURPOSE: We determined how frequently histological Gleason 3 + 3 = 6 tumors have the molecular characteristics of disease with metastatic potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed prostatectomy tissue from 337 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 disease. All tissue was re-reviewed in blinded fashion by genitourinary pathologists using 2005 ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) Gleason grading criteria. A previously validated Decipher® metastasis signature was calculated in each case based on a locked model. To compare patient characteristics across pathological Gleason score categories we used the Fisher exact test or the ANOVA F test. The distribution of Decipher scores among different clinicopathological groups was compared with the Wilcoxon rank sum test. The association of Decipher score with adverse pathology features was examined using logistic regression models. The significance level of all statistical tests was 0.05. RESULTS: Of men with Gleason 3 + 3 = 6 disease only 269 (80%) had a low Decipher score with intermediate and high scores in 43 (13%) and 25 (7%), respectively. Decipher scores were significantly higher among pathological Gleason 3 + 3 = 6 specimens from cases with adverse pathological features such as extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle involvement or positive margins (p <0.001). The median Decipher score in patients with margin negative pT2 disease was 0.23 (IQR 0.09-0.42) compared to 0.30 (IQR 0.17-0.42) in patients with pT3 disease or positive margins (p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Using a robust and validated prognostic signature we found that a small but not insignificant proportion of histological Gleason 6 tumors harbored molecular characteristics of aggressive cancer. Molecular profiling of such tumors at diagnosis may better select patients for active surveillance at diagnosis and trigger appropriate intervention during followup.

Validation of a Genomic Classifier for Predicting Post-Prostatectomy Recurrence in a Community Based Health Care Setting.

PURPOSE: We determined the value of Decipher®, a genomic classifier, to predict prostate cancer outcomes among patients after prostatectomy in a community health care setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined the experience of 224 men treated with radical prostatectomy from 1997 to 2009 at Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a large prepaid health plan in Portland, Oregon. Study subjects had aggressive prostate cancer with at least 1 of several criteria such as preoperative prostate specific antigen 20 ng/ml or greater, pathological Gleason score 8 or greater, stage pT3 disease or positive surgical margins at prostatectomy. The primary end point was clinical recurrence or metastasis after surgery evaluated using a time dependent c-index. Secondary end points were biochemical recurrence and salvage treatment failure. We compared the performance of Decipher alone to the widely used CAPRA-S (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical) score, and assessed the independent contributions of Decipher, CAPRA-S and their combination for the prediction of recurrence and treatment failure. RESULTS: Of the 224 patients treated 12 experienced clinical recurrence, 68 had biochemical recurrence and 34 experienced salvage treatment failure. At 10 years after prostatectomy the recurrence rate was 2.6% among patients with low Decipher scores but 13.6% among those with high Decipher scores (p=0.02). When CAPRA-S and Decipher scores were considered together, the discrimination accuracy of the ROC curve was increased by 0.11 compared to the CAPRA-S score alone (combined c-index 0.84 at 10 years after radical prostatectomy) for clinical recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Decipher improves our ability to predict clinical recurrence in prostate cancer and adds precision to conventional pathological prognostic measures.

Clinical and genomic analysis of metastatic prostate cancer progression with a background of postoperative biochemical recurrence.

OBJECTIVE: To better characterize the genomics of patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) who have metastatic disease progression in order to improve treatment decisions for prostate cancer. METHODS: The expression profiles of three clinical outcome groups after radical prostatectomy (RP) were compared: those with no evidence of disease (NED; n = 108); those with BCR (rise in prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level without metastasis; n = 163); and those with metastasis (n = 192). The patients were profiled using Human Exon 1.0 ST microarrays, and outcomes were supported by a median 18 years of follow-up. A metastasis signature was defined and verified in an independent RP cohort to ensure the robustness of the signature. Furthermore, bioinformatics characterization of the signature was conducted to decipher its biology. RESULTS: Minimal gene expression differences were observed between adjuvant treatment-naïve patients in the NED group and patients without metastasis in the BCR group. More than 95% of the differentially expressed genes (metastasis signature) were found in comparisons between primary tumours of metastasis patients and the two other outcome groups. The metastasis signature was validated in an independent cohort and was significantly associated with cell cycle genes, ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis, DNA repair, androgen, G-protein coupled and NOTCH signal transduction pathways. CONCLUSION: This study shows that metastasis development after BCR is associated with a distinct transcriptional programme that can be detected in the primary tumour. Patients with NED and BCR have highly similar transcriptional profiles, suggesting that measurement of PSA on its own is a poor surrogate for lethal disease. Use of genomic testing in patients undergoing RP with an initial rise in PSA level may be useful to improve secondary therapy decision-making.

Validation of a genomic classifier that predicts metastasis following radical prostatectomy in an at risk patient population.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy are candidates for secondary therapy. However, this higher risk population is heterogeneous. Many cases do not metastasize even when conservatively managed. Given the limited specificity of pathological features to predict metastasis, newer risk prediction models are needed. We report a validation study of a genomic classifier that predicts metastasis after radical prostatectomy in a high risk population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case-cohort design was used to sample 1,010 patients after radical prostatectomy at high risk for recurrence who were treated from 2000 to 2006. Patients had preoperative prostate specific antigen greater than 20 ng/ml, Gleason 8 or greater, pT3b or a Mayo Clinic nomogram score of 10 or greater. Patients with metastasis at diagnosis or any prior treatment for prostate cancer were excluded from analysis. A 20% random sampling created a subcohort that included all patients with metastasis. We generated 22-marker genomic classifier scores for 219 patients with available genomic data. ROC and decision curves, competing risk and weighted regression models were used to assess genomic classifier performance. RESULTS: The genomic classifier AUC was 0.79 for predicting 5-year metastasis after radical prostatectomy. Decision curves showed that the genomic classifier net benefit exceeded that of clinical only models. The genomic classifier was the predominant predictor of metastasis on multivariable analysis. The cumulative incidence of metastasis 5 years after radical prostatectomy was 2.4%, 6.0% and 22.5% in patients with low (60%), intermediate (21%) and high (19%) genomic classifier scores, respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that genomic information from the primary tumor can identify patients with adverse pathological features who are most at risk for metastasis and potentially lethal prostate cancer.

Gene Expression Correlates of Site-specific Metastasis Among Men With Lymph Node Positive Prostate Cancer Treated With Radical Prostatectomy: A Case Series.

Predictors of site-specific metastasis after radical prostatectomy (RP) are unknown despite prognostic differences between metastatic sites. We performed RNA expression analysis for 19 genes known to be correlated with aggressive prostate cancer in primary tumors of 63 men pN+ at RP (N = 35 developing metastases after RP vs N = 28 without metastases after RP). Of the men developing metastases, 22 (62.9%) had bone metastases, 8 (22.9%) had nonregional nodal metastases, and 5(14.3%) had visceral metastases. Patients with nodal metastases had higher androgen receptor expression relative to other metastatic sites and nonmetastatic controls (P = .001). This may explain the favorable prognosis of nodal metastases as it may be more androgen dependent.

Risk assessment for indeterminate pulmonary nodules using a novel, plasma-protein based biomarker assay.

BACKGROUND: The increase in lung cancer screening is intensifying the need for a noninvasive test to characterize the many indeterminate pulmonary nodules (IPN) discovered. Correctly identifying non-cancerous nodules is needed to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Alternatively, early identification of malignant nodules may represent a potentially curable form of lung cancer. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a plasma-based multiplexed protein assay for classifying IPN by discriminating between those with a lung cancer diagnosis established pathologically and those found to be clinically and radiographically stable for at least one year. METHODS: Using a novel technology, we developed assays for plasma proteins associated with lung cancer into a panel for characterizing the risk that an IPN found on chest imaging is malignant. The assay panel was evaluated with a cohort of 277 samples, all from current smokers with an IPN 4-30 mm. Subjects were divided into training and test sets to identify a Support Vector Machine (SVM) model for risk classification containing those proteins and clinical factors that added discriminatory information to the Veteran's Affairs (VA) Clinical Factors Model. The algorithm was then evaluated in an independent validation cohort. RESULTS: Among the 97 validation study subjects, 68 were grouped as having intermediate risk by the VA model of which the SVM model correctly identified 44 (65%) of these intermediate-risk samples as low (n=16) or high risk (n=28). The SVM model negative predictive value (NPV) was 94% and its sensitivity was 94%. CONCLUSION: The performance of the novel plasma protein biomarker assay supports its use as a noninvasive risk assessment aid for characterizing IPN. The high NPV of the SVM model suggests its application as a rule-out test to increase the confidence of providers to avoid aggressive interventions for their patients for whom the VA model result is an inconclusive, intermediate risk.

Development and Validation of a Prostate Cancer Genomic Signature that Predicts Early ADT Treatment Response Following Radical Prostatectomy.

Purpose: Currently, no genomic signature exists to distinguish men most likely to progress on adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. Here we develop and validate a gene expression signature to predict response to postoperative ADT.Experimental Design: A training set consisting of 284 radical prostatectomy patients was established after 1:1 propensity score matching metastasis between adjuvant-ADT (a-ADT)-treated and no ADT-treated groups. An ADT Response Signature (ADT-RS) was identified from neuroendocrine and AR signaling-related genes. Two independent cohorts were used to form three separate data sets for validation (set I, n = 232; set II, n = 435; set III, n = 612). The primary endpoint of the analysis was postoperative metastasis.Results: Increases in ADT-RS score were associated with a reduction in risk of metastasis only in a-ADT patients. On multivariable analysis, ADT-RS by ADT treatment interaction term remained associated with metastasis in both validation sets (set I: HR = 0.18, Pinteraction = 0.009; set II: HR = 0.25, Pinteraction = 0.019). In a matched validation set III, patients with Low ADT-RS scores had similar 10-year metastasis rates in the a-ADT and no-ADT groups (30.1% vs. 31.0%, P = 0.989). Among High ADT-RS patients, 10-year metastasis rates were significantly lower for a-ADT versus no-ADT patients (9.4% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.021). The marginal ADT-RS by ADT interaction remained significant in the matched dataset (Pinteraction = 0.035).Conclusions: Patients with High ADT-RS benefited from a-ADT. In combination with prognostic risk factors, use of ADT-RS may thus allow for identification of ADT-responsive tumors that may benefit most from early androgen blockade after radical prostatectomy. We discovered a gene signature that when present in primary prostate tumors may be useful to predict patients who may respond to early ADT after surgery. Clin Cancer Res; 24(16); 3908-16. ©2018 AACR.

Performance of a Prostate Cancer Genomic Classifier in Predicting Metastasis in Men with Prostate-specific Antigen Persistence Postprostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer patients who have a detectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) postprostatectomy may harbor pre-existing metastatic disease. To our knowledge, none of the commercially available genomic biomarkers have been investigated in such men. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if a 22-gene genomic classifier can independently predict development of metastasis in men with PSA persistence postoperatively. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multi-institutional study of 477 men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1990 and 2015 from three academic centers. Patients were categorized as detectable PSA (n=150) or undetectable (n=327) based on post-RP PSA nadir ≥0.1 ng/ml. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISITICAL ANALYSIS: Cumulative incidence curves for metastasis were constructed using Fine-Gray competing risks analysis. Penalized Cox univariable and multivariable (MVA) proportional hazards models were performed to evaluate the association of the genomic classifier with metastasis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up for censored patients was 57 mo. The median time from RP to first postoperative PSA was 1.4 mo. Detectable PSA patients were more likely to have higher adverse pathologic features compared with undetectable PSA patients. On MVA, only genomic high-risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.02-19.41, p=0.001), detectable PSA (HR: 4.26, 95% CI: 1.16-21.8, p=0.03), and lymph node invasion (HR: 12.2, 95% CI: 2.46-70.7, p=0.003) remained prognostic factors for metastasis. Among detectable PSA patients, the 5-yr metastasis rate was 0.90% for genomic low/intermediate and 18% for genomic high risk (p<0.001). Genomic high risk remained independently prognostic on MVA (HR: 5.61, 95% CI: 1.48-22.7, p=0.01) among detectable PSA patients. C-index for Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical score, Gandaglia nomogram, and the genomic classifier plus either Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical score or Gandaglia were 0.69, 0.68, and 0.82 or 0.81, respectively. Sample size was a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite patients with a detectable PSA harboring significantly higher rates of aggressive clinicopathologic features, Decipher independently predicts for metastasis. Prospective validation of these findings is warranted and will be collected as part of the ongoing randomized trial NRG GU-002. PATIENT SUMMARY: Decipher independently predicted metastasis for patients with detectable prostate-specific antigen after prostatectomy.

Development and Validation of a Novel Integrated Clinical-Genomic Risk Group Classification for Localized Prostate Cancer.

Purpose It is clinically challenging to integrate genomic-classifier results that report a numeric risk of recurrence into treatment recommendations for localized prostate cancer, which are founded in the framework of risk groups. We aimed to develop a novel clinical-genomic risk grouping system that can readily be incorporated into treatment guidelines for localized prostate cancer. Materials and Methods Two multicenter cohorts (n = 991) were used for training and validation of the clinical-genomic risk groups, and two additional cohorts (n = 5,937) were used for reclassification analyses. Competing risks analysis was used to estimate the risk of distant metastasis. Time-dependent c-indices were constructed to compare clinicopathologic risk models with the clinical-genomic risk groups. Results With a median follow-up of 8 years for patients in the training cohort, 10-year distant metastasis rates for National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low, favorable-intermediate, unfavorable-intermediate, and high-risk were 7.3%, 9.2%, 38.0%, and 39.5%, respectively. In contrast, the three-tier clinical-genomic risk groups had 10-year distant metastasis rates of 3.5%, 29.4%, and 54.6%, for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk, respectively, which were consistent in the validation cohort (0%, 25.9%, and 55.2%, respectively). C-indices for the clinical-genomic risk grouping system (0.84; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.93) were improved over NCCN (0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.86) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.84), and 30% of patients using NCCN low/intermediate/high would be reclassified by the new three-tier system and 67% of patients would be reclassified from NCCN six-tier (very-low- to very-high-risk) by the new six-tier system. Conclusion A commercially available genomic classifier in combination with standard clinicopathologic variables can generate a simple-to-use clinical-genomic risk grouping that more accurately identifies patients at low, intermediate, and high risk for metastasis and can be easily incorporated into current guidelines to better risk-stratify patients.

Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of the Performance of the Decipher Genomic Classifier in High-Risk Men After Prostatectomy to Predict Development of Metastatic Disease.

Purpose To perform the first meta-analysis of the performance of the genomic classifier test, Decipher, in men with prostate cancer postprostatectomy. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Decipher genomic resource information database were searched for published reports between 2011 and 2016 of men treated by prostatectomy that assessed the benefit of the Decipher test. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models fit to individual patient data were performed; meta-analyses were conducted by pooling the study-specific hazard ratios (HRs) using random-effects modeling. Extent of heterogeneity between studies was determined with the I2 test. Results Five studies (975 total patients, and 855 patients with individual patient-level data) were eligible for analysis, with a median follow-up of 8 years. Of the total cohort, 60.9%, 22.6%, and 16.5% of patients were classified by Decipher as low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively. The 10-year cumulative incidence metastases rates were 5.5%, 15.0%, and 26.7% ( P < .001), respectively, for the three risk classifications. Pooling the study-specific Decipher HRs across the five studies resulted in an HR of 1.52 (95% CI, 1.39 to 1.67; I2 = 0%) per 0.1 unit. In multivariable analysis of individual patient data, adjusting for clinicopathologic variables, Decipher remained a statistically significant predictor of metastasis (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.47; P < .001) per 0.1 unit. The C-index for 10-year distant metastasis of the clinical model alone was 0.76; this increased to 0.81 with inclusion of Decipher. Conclusion The genomic classifier test, Decipher, can independently improve prognostication of patients postprostatectomy, as well as within nearly all clinicopathologic, demographic, and treatment subgroups. Future study of how to best incorporate genomic testing in clinical decision-making and subsequent treatment recommendations is warranted.

Ability of a Genomic Classifier to Predict Metastasis and Prostate Cancer-specific Mortality after Radiation or Surgery based on Needle Biopsy Specimens.

BACKGROUND: Decipher is a validated genomic classifier developed to determine the biological potential for metastasis after radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of biopsy Decipher to predict metastasis and Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in primarily intermediate- to high-risk patients treated with RP or radiation therapy (RT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and thirty-five patients treated with either RP (n=105) or RT±androgen deprivation therapy (n=130) with available genomic expression profiles generated from diagnostic biopsy specimens from seven tertiary referral centers. The highest-grade core was sampled and Decipher was calculated based on a locked random forest model. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Metastasis and PCSM were the primary and secondary outcomes of the study, respectively. Cox analysis and c-index were used to evaluate the performance of Decipher. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: With a median follow-up of 6 yr among censored patients, 34 patients developed metastases and 11 died of prostate cancer. On multivariable analysis, biopsy Decipher remained a significant predictor of metastasis (hazard ratio: 1.37 per 10% increase in score, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.78, p=0.018) after adjusting for clinical variables. For predicting metastasis 5-yr post-biopsy, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score had a c-index of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.69), while Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment plus biopsy Decipher had a c-index of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60-0.82). National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group had a c-index of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.53-0.77), while National Comprehensive Cancer Network plus biopsy Decipher had a c-index of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.66-0.82). Biopsy Decipher was a significant predictor of PCSM (hazard ratio: 1.57 per 10% increase in score, 95% CI: 1.03-2.48, p=0.037), with a 5-yr PCSM rate of 0%, 0%, and 9.4% for Decipher low, intermediate, and high, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Biopsy Decipher predicted metastasis and PCSM from diagnostic biopsy specimens of primarily intermediate- and high-risk men treated with first-line RT or RP. PATIENT SUMMARY: Biopsy Decipher predicted metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality risk from diagnostic biopsy specimens.

Evaluation of a genomic classifier in radical prostatectomy patients with lymph node metastasis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the Decipher test in predicting lymph node invasion (LNI) on radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. METHODS: We identified 1,987 consecutive patients with RP who received the Decipher test between February and August 2015 (contemporary cohort). In the contemporary cohort, only the Decipher score from RP specimens was available for analysis. In addition, we identified a consecutive cohort of patients treated with RP between 2006 and 2012 at the University of California, San Diego, with LNI upon pathologic examination (retrospective cohort). The retrospective cohort yielded seven, 22, and 18 tissue specimens from prostate biopsy, RP, and lymph nodes (LNs) for individual patients, respectively. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the performance of Decipher in the contemporary cohort with LNI as the endpoint. In the retrospective cohort, concordance of risk groups was assessed using validated cut-points for low (<0.45), intermediate (0.45-0.60), and high (>0.60) Decipher scores. RESULTS: In the contemporary cohort, 51 (2.6%) patients had LNI. Decipher had an odds ratio of 1.73 (95% confidence interval, 1.46-2.05) and 1.42 (95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.7) per 10% increase in score on univariable and multivariable (adjusting for pathologic Gleason score, extraprostatic extension, and seminal vesicle invasion), respectively. No significant difference in the clinical and pathologic characteristics between the LN positive patients of contemporary and retrospective cohorts was observed (all P>0.05). Accordingly, among LN-positive patients in the contemporary cohort and retrospective cohort, 80% and 77% had Decipher high risk scores (P=1). In the retrospective cohort, prostate biopsy cores with the highest Gleason grade and percentage of tumor involvement had 86% Decipher risk concordance with both RP and LN specimens. CONCLUSION: Decipher scores were highly concordant between pre- and post-surgical specimens. Further, Decipher scores from RP tissue were predictive of LNI at RP. If validated in a larger cohort of prostate biopsy specimens for prediction of adverse pathology at RP, Decipher may be useful for improved pre-operative staging.

Decipher Genomic Classifier Measured on Prostate Biopsy Predicts Metastasis Risk.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the ability of the Decipher genomic classifier in predicting metastasis from analysis of prostate needle biopsy diagnostic tumor tissue specimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-seven patients with available biopsy specimens were identified from a cohort of 169 men treated with radical prostatectomy in a previously reported Decipher validation study at Cleveland Clinic. A Cox multivariable proportional hazards model and survival C-index were used to evaluate the performance of Decipher. RESULTS: With a median follow up of 8 years, 8 patients metastasized and 3 died of prostate cancer. The Decipher plus National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) model had an improved C-index of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.96) compared to NCCN alone (C-index 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.87). On multivariable analysis, Decipher was the only significant predictor of metastasis when adjusting for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen and biopsy Gleason score (Decipher hazard ratio per 10% increase 1.72, 95% CI 1.07-2.81, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Biopsy Decipher predicted the risk of metastasis at 10 years post radical prostatectomy. While further validation is required on larger cohorts, preoperative knowledge of Decipher risk derived from biopsy could indicate the need for multimodality therapy and help set patient expectations of therapeutic burden.

A genomic classifier improves prediction of metastatic disease within 5 years after surgery in node-negative high-risk prostate cancer patients managed by radical prostatectomy without adjuvant therapy.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is a standard first-line therapy for men with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer. Clinical factors such as tumor grade, stage, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) are currently used to identify those who are at risk of recurrence and who may benefit from adjuvant therapy, but novel biomarkers that improve risk stratification and that distinguish local from systemic recurrence are needed. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adding the Decipher genomic classifier, a validated metastasis risk-prediction model, to standard risk-stratification tools (CAPRA-S and Stephenson nomogram) improves accuracy in predicting metastatic disease within 5 yr after surgery (rapid metastasis [RM]) in an independent cohort of men with adverse pathologic features after radical prostatectomy (RP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The study population consisted of 169 patients selected from 2641 men who underwent RP at the Cleveland Clinic between 1987 and 2008 who met the following criteria: (1) preoperative PSA>20 ng/ml, stage pT3 or margin positive, or Gleason score≥8; (2) pathologic node negative; (3) undetectable post-RP PSA; (4) no neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy; and (5) minimum of 5-yr follow-up for controls. The final study cohort consisted of 15 RM patients and 154 patients as non-RM controls. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The performance of Decipher was evaluated individually and in combination with clinical risk factors using concordance index (c-index), decision curve analysis, and logistic regression for prediction of RM. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: RM patients developed metastasis at a median of 2.3 yr (interquartile range: 1.7-3.3). In multivariable analysis, Decipher was a significant predictor of RM (odds ratio: 1.48; p=0.018) after adjusting for clinical risk factors. Decipher had the highest c-index, 0.77, compared with the Stephenson model (c-index: 0.75) and CAPRA-S (c-index: 0.72) as well as with a panel of previously reported prostate cancer biomarkers unrelated to Decipher. Integration of Decipher into the Stephenson nomogram increased the c-index from 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.85) to 0.79 (95% CI, 0.68-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Decipher was independently validated as a genomic metastasis signature for predicting metastatic disease within 5 yr after surgery in a cohort of high-risk men treated with RP and managed conservatively without any adjuvant therapy. Integration of Decipher into clinical nomograms increased prediction of RM. Decipher may allow identification of men most at risk for metastatic progression who should be considered for multimodal therapy or inclusion in clinical trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: Use of Decipher in addition to standard clinical information more accurately identified men who developed metastatic disease within 5 yr after surgery. The results suggest that Decipher allows improved identification of the men who should consider secondary therapy from among the majority that may be managed conservatively after surgery.

Novel Biomarker Signature That May Predict Aggressive Disease in African American Men With Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We studied the ethnicity-specific expression of prostate cancer (PC) -associated biomarkers to evaluate whether genetic/biologic factors affect ethnic disparities in PC pathogenesis and disease progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 154 African American (AA) and 243 European American (EA) patients from four medical centers were matched according to the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment postsurgical score within each institution. The distribution of mRNA expression levels of 20 validated biomarkers reported to be associated with PC initiation and progression was compared with ethnicity using false discovery rate, adjusted Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney, and logistic regression models. A conditional logistic regression model was used to evaluate the interaction between ethnicity and biomarkers for predicting clinicopathologic outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 20 biomarkers examined, six showed statistically significant differential expression in AA compared with EA men in one or more statistical models. These include ERG (P < .001), AMACR (P < .001), SPINK1 (P = .001), NKX3-1 (P = .03), GOLM1 (P = .03), and androgen receptor (P = .04). Dysregulation of AMACR (P = .036), ERG (P = .036), FOXP1 (P = .041), and GSTP1 (P = .049) as well as loss-of-function mutations for tumor suppressors NKX3-1 (P = .025) and RB1 (P = .037) predicted risk of pathologic T3 disease in an ethnicity-dependent manner. Dysregulation of GOLM1 (P = .037), SRD5A2 (P = .023), and MKi67 (P = .023) predicted clinical outcomes, including 3-year biochemical recurrence and metastasis at 5 years. A greater proportion of AA men than EA men had triple-negative (ERG-negative/ETS-negative/SPINK1-negative) disease (51% v 35%; P = .002). CONCLUSION: We have identified a subset of PC biomarkers that predict the risk of clinicopathologic outcomes in an ethnicity-dependent manner. These biomarkers may explain in part the biologic contribution to ethnic disparity in PC outcomes between EA and AA men.

Characterization of 1577 primary prostate cancers reveals novel biological and clinicopathologic insights into molecular subtypes.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) molecular subtypes have been defined by essentially mutually exclusive events, including ETS gene fusions (most commonly involving ERG) and SPINK1 overexpression. Clinical assessment may aid in disease stratification, complementing available prognostic tests. OBJECTIVE: To determine the analytical validity and clinicopatholgic associations of microarray-based molecular subtyping. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed Affymetrix GeneChip expression profiles for 1577 patients from eight radical prostatectomy cohorts, including 1351 cases assessed using the Decipher prognostic assay (GenomeDx Biosciences, San Diego, CA, USA) performed in a laboratory with Clinical Laboratory Improvements Amendment certification. A microarray-based (m-) random forest ERG classification model was trained and validated. Outlier expression analysis was used to predict other mutually exclusive non-ERG ETS gene rearrangements (ETS(+)) or SPINK1 overexpression (SPINK1(+)). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Associations with clinical features and outcomes by multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver operating curves. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The m-ERG classifier showed 95% accuracy in an independent validation subset (155 samples). Across cohorts, 45% of PCas were classified as m-ERG(+), 9% as m-ETS(+), 8% as m-SPINK1(+), and 38% as triple negative (m-ERG(-)/m-ETS(-)/m-SPINK1(-)). Gene expression profiling supports three underlying molecularly defined groups: m-ERG(+), m-ETS(+), and m-SPINK1(+)/triple negative. On multivariate analysis, m-ERG(+) tumors were associated with lower preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen and Gleason scores, but greater extraprostatic extension (p<0.001). m-ETS(+) tumors were associated with seminal vesicle invasion (p=0.01), while m-SPINK1(+)/triple negative tumors had higher Gleason scores and were more frequent in Black/African American patients (p<0.001). Clinical outcomes were not significantly different among subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: A clinically available prognostic test (Decipher) can also assess PCa molecular subtypes, obviating the need for additional testing. Clinicopathologic differences were found among subtypes based on global expression patterns. PATIENT SUMMARY: Molecular subtyping of prostate cancer can be achieved using extra data generated from a clinical-grade, genome-wide expression-profiling prognostic assay (Decipher). Transcriptomic and clinical analysis support three distinct molecular subtypes: (1) m-ERG(+), (2) m-ETS(+), and (3) m-SPINK1(+)/triple negative (m-ERG(-)/m-ETS(-)/m-SPINK1(-)). Incorporation of subtyping into a clinically available assay may facilitate additional applications beyond routine prognosis.

Cyclin D1 Loss Distinguishes Prostatic Small-Cell Carcinoma from Most Prostatic Adenocarcinomas.

PURPOSE: Small-cell neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic carcinoma is an increasingly common resistance mechanism to potent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), but can be difficult to identify morphologically. We investigated whether cyclin D1 and p16 expression can inform on Rb functional status and distinguish small-cell carcinoma from adenocarcinoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We used gene expression data and immunohistochemistry to examine cyclin D1 and p16 levels in patient-derived xenografts (PDX), and prostatic small-cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma specimens. RESULTS: Using PDX, we show proof-of-concept that a high ratio of p16 to cyclin D1 gene expression reflects underlying Rb functional loss and distinguishes morphologically identified small-cell carcinoma from prostatic adenocarcinoma in patient specimens (n = 13 and 9, respectively). At the protein level, cyclin D1, but not p16, was useful to distinguish small-cell carcinoma from adenocarcinoma. Overall, 88% (36/41) of small-cell carcinomas showed cyclin D1 loss by immunostaining compared with 2% (2/94) of Gleason score 7-10 primary adenocarcinomas at radical prostatectomy, 9% (4/44) of Gleason score 9-10 primary adenocarcinomas at needle biopsy, and 7% (8/115) of individual metastases from 39 patients at autopsy. Though rare adenocarcinomas showed cyclin D1 loss, many of these were associated with clinical features of small-cell carcinoma, and in a cohort of men treated with adjuvant ADT who developed metastasis, lower cyclin D1 gene expression was associated with more rapid onset of metastasis and death. CONCLUSIONS: Cyclin D1 loss identifies prostate tumors with small-cell differentiation and may identify a small subset of adenocarcinomas with poor prognosis. Clin Cancer Res; 21(24); 5619-29. ©2015 AACR.

Discovery and validation of novel expression signature for postcystectomy recurrence in high-risk bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nearly half of muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients succumb to their disease following cystectomy. Selecting candidates for adjuvant therapy is currently based on clinical parameters with limited predictive power. This study aimed to develop and validate genomic-based signatures that can better identify patients at risk for recurrence than clinical models alone. METHODS: Transcriptome-wide expression profiles were generated using 1.4 million feature-arrays on archival tumors from 225 patients who underwent radical cystectomy and had muscle-invasive and/or node-positive bladder cancer. Genomic (GC) and clinical (CC) classifiers for predicting recurrence were developed on a discovery set (n = 133). Performances of GC, CC, an independent clinical nomogram (IBCNC), and genomic-clinicopathologic classifiers (G-CC, G-IBCNC) were assessed in the discovery and independent validation (n = 66) sets. GC was further validated on four external datasets (n = 341). Discrimination and prognostic abilities of classifiers were compared using area under receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUCs). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A 15-feature GC was developed on the discovery set with area under curve (AUC) of 0.77 in the validation set. This was higher than individual clinical variables, IBCNC (AUC = 0.73), and comparable to CC (AUC = 0.78). Performance was improved upon combining GC with clinical nomograms (G-IBCNC, AUC = 0.82; G-CC, AUC = 0.86). G-CC high-risk patients had elevated recurrence probabilities (P < .001), with GC being the best predictor by multivariable analysis (P = .005). Genomic-clinicopathologic classifiers outperformed clinical nomograms by decision curve and reclassification analyses. GC performed the best in validation compared with seven prior signatures. GC markers remained prognostic across four independent datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The validated genomic-based classifiers outperform clinical models for predicting postcystectomy bladder cancer recurrence. This may be used to better identify patients who need more aggressive management.

Whole-transcriptome profiling of thyroid nodules identifies expression-based signatures for accurate thyroid cancer diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Due to the limitations of fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) cytopathology, many individuals who present with thyroid nodules eventually undergo thyroid surgery to diagnose thyroid cancer. The objective of this study was to use whole-transcriptome profiling to develop and validate a genomic classifier that significantly improves the accuracy of preoperative thyroid cancer diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nucleic acids were extracted and amplified for microarray expression analysis on the Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST GeneChips from 1-mm-diameter formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded thyroid tumor tissue cores. A training group of 60 thyroidectomy specimens (30 cancers and 30 benign lesions) were used to assess differential expression and for subsequent generation of a genomic classifier. The classifier was validated in a blinded fashion on a group of 31 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded thyroid FNAB specimens. RESULTS: Expression profiles of the 57 thyroidectomy training and 31 FNAB validation specimens that passed a series of quality control steps were analyzed. A genomic classifier composed of 249 markers that corresponded to 154 genes, had an overall validated accuracy of 90.0% in the 31 patient FNAB specimens and had positive and negative predictive values of 100% and 85.7%, respectively. The majority of the identified markers that made up the classifier represented non-protein-encoding RNAs. CONCLUSIONS: Whole-transcriptome profiling of thyroid nodule surgical specimens allowed for the development of a genomic classifier that improved the accuracy of preoperative thyroid cancer FNAB diagnosis.