Cancer Screening for Transgender Individuals: Guidelines, Best Practices, and a Proposed Care Model.

Few transgender-specific cancer screening recommendations exist. This review aims to cover current guidelines and practice patterns of cancer screening in transgender patients and, where evidence-based data are lacking, to draw from cisgender screening guidelines to suggest best practices for transgender patients based on anatomic inventory. Sufficient evidence does not exist to determine the long-term effects of gender-affirming hormone therapy on cancer risk. In the future, cancer screening and prevention should be focused on anatomic inventory and high-risk behaviors.

Variation and Disparity in the Use of Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification Tools in the United States.

In this review we summarize evidence from US studies examining variation in the use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and tissue-based gene expression tests (genomic tests), focusing on sources of regional and racial variation. Large observational studies indicate that prostate MRI and genomic testing vary significantly at the regional level as measured across multiple geographic boundaries. Similarly, there is lower use of prostate MRI among Black versus White-identified patients Black in comparison to those who are White, as well as evidence of less use among Hispanic and Asian versus White patients. These findings indicate opportunities to address modifiable sources of practice variation in localized prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we found that use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and genetic testing differed by region, and race, with less prostate MRI use among Black versus White patients. These findings can help raise awareness about gaps in access to new prostate cancer tools.

Association Between a 22-feature Genomic Classifier and Biopsy Gleason Upgrade During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although the Decipher genomic classifier has been validated as a prognostic tool for several prostate cancer endpoints, little is known about its role in assessing the risk of biopsy reclassification for patients on active surveillance, a key event that often triggers treatment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between Decipher genomic classifier scores and biopsy Gleason upgrading among patients on active surveillance. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective cohort study among patients with low- and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance who underwent biopsy-based Decipher testing as part of their clinical care. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We evaluated the association between the Decipher score and any increase in biopsy Gleason grade group (GG) using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. We compared the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for models comprising baseline clinical variables with or without the Decipher score. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We identified 133 patients for inclusion with a median age of 67.7 yr and median prostate-specific of 5.6 ng/ml. At enrollment, 75.9% had GG1 and 24.1% had GG2 disease. Forty-three patients experienced biopsy upgrading. On multivariable logistic regression, the Decipher score was significantly associated with biopsy upgrading (odds ratio 1.37 per 0.10 unit increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.79; p = 0.02). The Decipher score was associated with upgrading among patients with biopsy GG 1 disease, but not GG2 disease. The discriminative ability of a clinical model (AUC 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.74) was improved by integration of the Decipher score (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The Decipher genomic classifier score was associated with short-term biopsy Gleason upgrading among patients on active surveillance. PATIENT SUMMARY: The results from this study indicate that among patients with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance, those with higher Decipher scores were more likely to have higher-grade disease found over time. These findings indicate that the Decipher test might be useful for guiding the intensity of monitoring during active surveillance, such as more frequent biopsy for patients with higher scores.

NCCN Risk Reclassification in Black Men with Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer After Genomic Testing.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the utility of genomic testing in risk-stratifying Black patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 63 Black men deemed eligible for active surveillance based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, who underwent OncotypeDx Genomic Prostate Score testing between April 2016 and July 2020. Nonparametric statistical testing was used to compare relevant features between patients reclassified to a higher NCCN risk after genomic testing and those who were not reclassified. RESULTS: The median age was 66 years and median pre-biopsy PSA was 7.3. Initial risk classifications were: very low risk: 7 (11.1%), low risk: 24(38.1%), favorable intermediate risk: 31(49.2%), and unfavorable intermediate risk: 1 (1.6%). Overall, NCCN risk classifications after Genomic Prostate Score testing were significantly higher than initial classifications (P=.003, Wilcoxon signed-rank). Among patients with discordant risk designations, 28(28/40, 70%) were reclassified to a higher NCCN risk after genomic testing. A pre-biopsy prostate specific antigen of greater than 10 did not have significantly higher odds of HBR (OR:2.16 [95% CI: 0.64,7.59, P=.2). Of favorable intermediate risk patients, 20(64.5%) were reclassified to a higher NCCN risk. Ultimately, 18 patients underwent definitive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of genomic testing in risk stratifying Black men with low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer resulted in overall higher NCCN risk classifications. Our findings suggest a role for increased utilization of genomic testing in refining risk-stratification within this patient population. These tests may better inform treatment decisions on an individualized basis.

Racial Differences in Incident Genitourinary Cancer Cases Captured in the National Cancer Database.

Background and Objectives: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) captures nearly 70% of all new cancer diagnoses in the United States, but there exists significant variation in this capture rate based on primary tumor location and other patient demographic factors. Prostate cancer has the lowest coverage rate of all major cancers, and other genitourinary malignancies likewise fall below the average NCDB case coverage rate. We aimed to explore NCDB coverage rates for patients with genitourinary cancers as a function of race. Materials and Methods: We compared the incidence of cancer cases in the NCDB with contemporary United States Cancer Statistics data. Results: Across all malignancies, American Indian/Alaskan Natives subjects demonstrated the lowest capture rates, and Asian/Pacific Islander subjects exhibited the second-lowest capture rates. Between White and Black subjects, capture rates were significantly higher for White subjects overall and for prostate cancer and kidney cancer in White males, but significantly higher for bladder cancer in Black versus White females. No significant differences were observed in coverage rates for kidney cancer in females, bladder cancer in males, penile cancer, or testicular cancer in White versus Black patients. Conclusions: Differential access to Commission on Cancer-accredited treatment facilities for racial minorities with genitourinary cancer constitutes a unique avenue for health equity research.