The Cambridge Prognostic Groups for improved prediction of disease mortality at diagnosis in primary non-metastatic prostate cancer: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to validate a new five-tiered prognostic classification system to better discriminate cancer-specific mortality in men diagnosed with primary non-metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: We applied a recently described five-strata model, the Cambridge Prognostic Groups (CPGs 1-5), in two international cohorts and tested prognostic performance against the current standard three-strata classification of low-, intermediate- or high-risk disease. Diagnostic clinico-pathological data for men obtained from the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) and the Singapore Health Study were used. The main outcome measure was prostate cancer mortality (PCM) stratified by age group and treatment modality. RESULTS: The PCBaSe cohort included 72,337 men, of whom 7162 died of prostate cancer. The CPG model successfully classified men with different risks of PCM with competing risk regression confirming significant intergroup distinction (p < 0.0001). The CPGs were significantly better at stratified prediction of PCM compared to the current three-tiered system (concordance index (C-index) 0.81 vs. 0.77, p < 0.0001). This superiority was maintained for every age group division (p < 0.0001). Also in the ethnically different Singapore cohort of 2550 men with 142 prostate cancer deaths, the CPG model outperformed the three strata categories (C-index 0.79 vs. 0.76, p < 0.0001). The model also retained superior prognostic discrimination in the treatment sub-groups: radical prostatectomy (n = 20,586), C-index 0.77 vs. 074; radiotherapy (n = 11,872), C-index 0.73 vs. 0.69; and conservative management (n = 14,950), C-index 0.74 vs. 0.73. The CPG groups that sub-divided the old intermediate-risk (CPG2 vs. CPG3) and high-risk categories (CPG4 vs. CPG5) significantly discriminated PCM outcomes after radical therapy or conservative management (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This validation study of nearly 75,000 men confirms that the CPG five-tiered prognostic model has superior discrimination compared to the three-tiered model in predicting prostate cancer death across different age and treatment groups. Crucially, it identifies distinct sub-groups of men within the old intermediate-risk and high-risk criteria who have very different prognostic outcomes. We therefore propose adoption of the CPG model as a simple-to-use but more accurate prognostic stratification tool to help guide management for men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

A personalised approach to prostate cancer screening based on genotyping of risk founder alleles.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether genotyping for 18 prostate cancer founder variants is helpful in identifying high-risk individuals and for determining optimal screening regimens. METHODS: A serum PSA level was measured and a digital rectal examination (DRE) was performed on 2907 unaffected men aged 40-90. Three hundred and twenty-three men with an elevated PSA (≥4 ng ml⁻¹) or an abnormal DRE underwent a prostate biopsy. All men were genotyped for three founder alleles in BRCA1 (5382insC, 4153delA and C61G), for four alleles in CHEK2 (1100delC, IVS2+1G>A, del5395 and I157T), for one allele in NBS1 (657del5), for one allele in HOXB13 (G84E), and for nine low-risk single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). RESULTS: On the basis of an elevated PSA or an abnormal DRE, prostate cancer was diagnosed in 135 of 2907 men (4.6%). In men with a CHEK2 missense mutation I157T, the cancer detection rate among men with an elevated PSA or an abnormal DRE was much higher (10.2%, P=0.0008). The cancer detection rate rose with the number of SNP risk genotypes observed from 1.2% for men with no variant to 8.6% for men who carried six or more variants (P=0.04). No single variant was helpful on its own in predicting the presence of prostate cancer, however, the combination of all rare mutations and SNPs improved predictive power (area under the curve=0.59; P=0.03). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that testing for germline CHEK2 mutations improves the ability to predict the presence of prostate cancer in screened men, however, the clinical utility of incorporating DNA variants in the screening process is marginal.

Hand pattern indicates prostate cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: The ratio of digit lengths is fixed in utero, and may be a proxy indicator for prenatal testosterone levels. METHODS: We analysed the right-hand pattern and prostate cancer risk in 1524 prostate cancer cases and 3044 population-based controls. RESULTS: Compared with index finger shorter than ring finger (low 2D : 4D), men with index finger longer than ring finger (high 2D : 4D) showed a negative association, suggesting a protective effect with a 33% risk reduction (odds ratio (OR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-0.80). Risk reduction was even greater (87%) in age group <60 (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.09-0.21). CONCLUSION: Pattern of finger lengths may be a simple marker of prostate cancer risk, with length of 2D greater than 4D suggestive of lower risk.

Diagnostic radiation procedures and risk of prostate cancer.

Exposure to ionising radiation is an established risk factor for many cancers. We conducted a case-control study to investigate whether exposure to low dose ionisation radiation from diagnostic x-ray procedures could be established as a risk factor for prostate cancer. In all 431 young-onset prostate cancer cases and 409 controls frequency matched by age were included. Exposures to barium meal, barium enema, hip x-rays, leg x-rays and intravenous pyelogram (IVP) were considered. Exposures to barium enema (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-4.20) and hip x-rays (adjusted OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.42-3.49) at least 5 years before diagnosis were significantly associated with increased prostate cancer. For those with a family history of cancer, exposures to hip x-rays dating 10 or 20 years before diagnosis were associated with a significantly increased risk of prostate cancer: adjusted OR 5.01, 95% CI 1.64-15.31 and adjusted OR 14.23, 95% CI 1.83-110.74, respectively. Our findings show that exposure of the prostate gland to diagnostic radiological procedures may be associated with increased cancer risk. This effect seems to be modified by a positive family history of cancer suggesting that genetic factors may play a role in this risk association.

A nurse-delivered advice intervention can reduce chronic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use in general practice: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To find out whether a nurse-delivered educational package can reduce chronic oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) usage in general practice. METHOD: A prospective randomized controlled trial with assessment of economic cost/benefits was carried out in five general practices in Nottinghamshire with computerized prescribing systems, representing a mix of rural/urban and fundholding/non-fundholding practices. Patients suffering from non-malignant, non-inflammatory musculoskeletal pain received repeat prescriptions for oral NSAIDs. Two hundred and twenty-two patients were randomized to a control group (simple advice regarding NSAID use) or an intervention group (asked to withdraw their NSAIDs and employ appropriate alternative drug and non-drug therapies). All advice was supported by patient literature and delivered by a nurse practitioner trained in musculoskeletal assessment. The primary outcome measure was change in NSAID use 6 months after the intervention. Secondary outcome measures were changes in health and quality of life (SF-36 and EQ-5D questionnaires) and drug, health service and patient costs. RESULTS: An extra 28% of patients in the intervention group either stopped taking oral NSAIDs or reduced dosage by > or =50% at 6 months compared with controls. There was no detrimental effect on health and well-being. Oral NSAID prescription costs were significantly lowered in the intervention group but not in the control group. A non-significant increase in total drug prescription costs occurred in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-based intervention can reduce chronic NSAID usage and costs in primary care and would be cost-effective if maintained in the long term. This intervention package would be readily applicable in primary care.