Skin Cancer Risk Is Increased by Somatic Mutations Detected Noninvasively in Healthy-Appearing Sun-Exposed Skin.

Skin cancer risk is increased by exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR). Because UVR exposure accumulates over time and lighter skin is more susceptible to UVR, age and skin tone are risk factors for skin cancer. However, measurements of somatic mutations in healthy-appearing skin have not been used to calculate skin cancer risk. In this study, we developed a noninvasive test that quantifies somatic mutations in healthy-appearing sun-exposed skin and applied it to a 1038-subject cohort. Somatic mutations were combined with other known skin cancer risk factors to train a model to calculate risk. The final model (DNA-Skin Cancer Assessment of Risk) was trained to predict personal history of skin cancer from age, family history, skin tone, and mutation count. The addition of mutation count significantly improved model performance (OR = 1.3, 95% confidence interval = 1.14-1.48; P = 5.3 × 10-6) and made a more significant contribution than skin tone. Calculations of skin cancer risk matched the known United States population prevalence, indicating that DNA-Skin Cancer Assessment of Risk was well-calibrated. In conclusion, somatic mutations in healthy-appearing sun-exposed skin increase skin cancer risk, and mutations capture risk information that is not accounted for by other risk factors. Clinical utility is supported by the noninvasive nature of skin sample collection through adhesive patches.

Development and Validation of a Multiclass Model Defining Molecular Archetypes of Kidney Transplant Rejection: A Large Cohort Study of the Banff Human Organ Transplant Gene Expression Panel.

Gene expression profiling from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) renal allograft biopsies is a promising approach for feasibly providing a molecular diagnosis of rejection. However, large-scale studies evaluating the performance of models using NanoString platform data to define molecular archetypes of rejection are lacking. We tested a diverse retrospective cohort of over 1400 FFPE biopsy specimens, rescored according to Banff 2019 criteria and representing 10 of 11 United Network of Organ Sharing regions, using the Banff Human Organ Transplant panel from NanoString and developed a multiclass model from the gene expression data to assign relative probabilities of 4 molecular archetypes: No Rejection, Antibody-Mediated Rejection, T Cell-Mediated Rejection, and Mixed Rejection. Using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator regularized regression with 10-fold cross-validation fitted to 1050 biopsies in the discovery cohort and technically validated on an additional 345 biopsies, our model achieved overall accuracy of 85% in the discovery cohort and 80% in the validation cohort, with ≥75% positive predictive value for each class, except for the Mixed Rejection class in the validation cohort (positive predictive value, 53%). This study represents the technical validation of the first model built from a large and diverse sample of diagnostic FFPE biopsy specimens to define and classify molecular archetypes of histologically defined diagnoses as derived from Banff Human Organ Transplant panel gene expression profiling data.

Cell Cycle Progression Score, but Not Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog Loss, Is an Independent Prognostic Factor for Metastasis in Intermediate- and High-risk Prostate Cancer in Men Treated With and Without Salvage Radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The prognostic value for metastasis of the cell-cycle progression score and phosphatase and tensin homolog haven't been evaluated jointly in contemporary men with exclusively intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer. We evaluated associations of cell-cycle progression and phosphatase and tensin homolog with metastasis-free survival in contemporary intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer patients overall, and intermediate/high-risk men receiving salvage radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a case-cohort of 209 prostatectomy patients with intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, and a cohort of 172 such men who received salvage radiotherapy, cell-cycle progression score was calculated from RNA expression, and phosphatase and tensin homolog was analyzed by immunohistochemistry. Proportional hazards regression, weighted for case-cohort design or unweighted for the salvage radiotherapy cohort, was used to evaluate associations of cell-cycle progression, phosphatase and tensin homolog with metastasis-free survival. Improvement in model discrimination was evaluated with the concordance index. RESULTS: In the case-cohort 41 men had metastasis, and 17 developed metastasis in the salvage radiotherapy cohort, at median follow-up of 3 and 4 years, respectively. For both case-cohort and salvage radiotherapy cohort, cell-cycle progression was independently associated with metastasis-free survival after adjustment for Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical: hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 3.11 (1.70-5.69) and 1.85 (1.19-2.85), respectively. Adding cell-cycle progression to Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical increased the concordance index from 0.861 to 0.899 (case-cohort), and 0.745 to 0.819 (salvage radiotherapy cohort). Although statistically significant in univariate analyses, phosphatase and tensin homolog was no longer significant after adjustment for Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical. Analysis of interaction with National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group showed that cell-cycle progression had the strongest effect among unfavorable intermediate-risk men. CONCLUSIONS: In the first study to evaluate metastasis risk associated with cell-cycle progression and phosphatase and tensin homolog in exclusively intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, and in such men with salvage radiotherapy, cell-cycle progression but not phosphatase and tensin homolog was associated with significantly increased 2- to 3-fold risk of metastasis after Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical adjustment.

Validation of the cell cycle progression score to differentiate indolent from aggressive prostate cancer in men diagnosed through transurethral resection of the prostate biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Validation of biomarker-based prognostic models to improve risk stratification in men with localized prostate cancer (PrCa) remains a clinical need. It has previously been shown that the cell cycle progression (CCP) test provides significant, independent prognostic information for men who were incidentally diagnosed with PrCa after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and were conservatively managed. AIM: The results have been extended in a newly analyzed retrospective cohort of UK men diagnosed through TURP biopsy (TURP1B; N = 305). METHODS AND RESULTS: The CCP score was derived from TURP biopsy tissue and combined with a modified UCSF Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score (CAPRA) to generate the clinical cell-cycle risk score (CCR). The primary endpoint was PrCa-specific mortality (PSM). Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for a one-unit change in score. Median follow-up was 9.6 (IQR: 5.4, 14.1) years, and 67 (22%) men died from PrCa within 10 years of diagnosis. The median CCP score was 1.1 (IQR: 0.6, 1.7). In univariate analyses, CCR proved a significant prognosticator of PSM (HR per unit score change = 2.28; 95% CI: 1.89, 2.74; P = 1.0 × 10-19 ). In multivariate analyses, CCR remained a significant prognosticator of PSM after adjusting for CAPRA (HR per unit score change = 4.36; 95% CI: 2.65, 7.16; P = 1.3 × 10-8 ), indicating that its molecular component, CCP, provides significant, independent prognostic information. CONCLUSION: These findings validate a combined clinicopathologic and molecular prognostic model for conservatively managed men who are diagnosed through TURP, supporting the use of CCR to inform clinical management.

The Clinical Cell-Cycle Risk (CCR) Score Is Associated With Metastasis After Radiation Therapy and Provides Guidance on When to Forgo Combined Androgen Deprivation Therapy With Dose-Escalated Radiation.

PURPOSE: The clinical cell-cycle risk (CCR) score, which combines the University of California, San Francisco's Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) and the cell cycle progression (CCP) molecular score, has been validated to be prognostic of disease progression for men with prostate cancer. This study evaluated the ability of the CCR score to prognosticate the risk of metastasis in men receiving dose-escalated radiation therapy (RT) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective, multi-institutional cohort study included men with localized National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk prostate cancer (N = 741). Patients were treated with dose-escalated RT with or without ADT. The primary outcome was time to metastasis. RESULTS: The CCR score prognosticated metastasis with a hazard ratio (HR) per unit score of 2.22 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.71-2.89; P < .001). The CCR score better prognosticated metastasis than NCCN risk group (CCR, P < .001; NCCN, P = .46), CAPRA score (CCR, P = .002; CAPRA, P = .59), or CCP score (CCR, P < .001; CCP, P = .59) alone. In bivariable analyses, CCR score remained highly prognostic when accounting for ADT versus no ADT (HR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.61-2.96; P < .001), ADT duration as a continuous variable (HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.59-2.79; P < .001), or ADT given at or below the recommended duration for each NCCN risk group (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.69-2.86; P < .001). Men with CCR scores below or above the multimodality threshold (CCR score, 2.112) had a 10-year risk of metastasis of 3.7% and 21.24%, respectively. Men with below-threshold scores receiving RT alone had a 10-year risk of metastasis of 3.7%, and for men receiving RT plus ADT, the 10-year risk of metastasis was also 3.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The CCR score accurately and precisely prognosticates metastasis and adds clinically actionable information relative to guideline-recommended therapies based on NCCN risk in men undergoing dose-escalated RT with or without ADT. For men with scores below the multimodality threshold, adding ADT may not significantly reduce their 10-year risk of metastasis.

Personalizing Localized Prostate Cancer: Validation of a Combined Clinical Cell-cycle Risk (CCR) Score Threshold for Prognosticating Benefit From Multimodality Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The combined clinical cell-cycle risk (CCR) score is a validated model that combines the cell-cycle progression (CCP) score with the University of California San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score. This score determines the risk of progressive disease for men with prostate cancer. Here, we further validate the prognostic ability of the CCR score and evaluate its ability to help determine which patients may safely forgo multimodality therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the CCR and a CCR-based multimodality threshold (2.112) in a retrospective, multi-institutional cohort of men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate- or high-risk localized disease (N = 718). These men received single or multimodality therapy (androgen deprivation with radiation [RT], or surgery with adjuvant RT or hormones). RESULTS: CCR score prognosticated metastasis for single-modality therapy, as a continuous variable (hazard ratio, 3.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.61-6.06) and when dichotomized at the threshold (hazard ratio, 15.90; 95% CI, 5.43-46.52). The 10-year Kaplan-Meier risk for those receiving single-modality (RT or surgical) therapy with CCR scores below and above the threshold for single-modality treatment was 4.3% (95% CI, 1.0%-17.1%) and 20.4% (95% CI, 13.2%-30.7%), respectively. Using the threshold, 27% of men with newly diagnosed high-risk and 73% with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease could avoid multimodality therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CCR scores below the multimodality threshold (2.112) may safely forgo multimodality therapy. The CCR score can be used as a decision aid to counsel men whether or not single-modality therapy would be sufficient for their intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer.

Cell-cycle risk score more accurately determines the risk for metastases and death in prostatectomy patients compared with clinical features alone.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer treatment aims to prevent metastases and disease-specific mortality. Pathologic parameters have limited ability to predict these outcomes, but biomarkers can improve risk discrimination. We evaluated the ability of cell-cycle progression and combined cell-cycle risk scores to predict metastases and disease-specific mortality after prostatectomy. METHODS: Eligibility included (1) treatment with radical prostatectomy (1985-1997); (2) cell-cycle progression score; (3) preoperative prostate-specific antigen; (4) no neoadjuvant therapy; and (5) clinical follow-up (N = 360). Cancer of the prostate risk assessment postsurgical score was combined with cell cycle progression into the prespecified combined cell-cycle risk score. Hazard ratios (HRs) are reported per unit score. RESULTS: In total, 11% (41/360) developed metastases and 9% (33/360) experienced disease-specific mortality. Combined cell-cycle risk score predicted metastases and disease-specific mortality post-radical prostatectomy (p < 1 × 10-8 ). Adjusting for cancer of the prostate risk assessment postsurgical score, the combined cell-cycle risk score remained a predictor of metastases (HR = 3.03 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.49, 6.20]; p = .003] and disease-specific mortality (HR = 3.40 [95% CI: 1.52, 7.59]; p = .004). Of patients with biochemical recurrence, 25% (41/163) developed metastases. Cancer of the prostate risk assessment postsurgical score was predictive of metastases postbiochemical recurrence but was improved by the addition of cell cycle progression (HR = 1.70 [95% CI: 1.14, 2.53]; p = .012). The combined cell-cycle risk was also prognostic of metastases post-biochemical recurrence (HR = 1.56 [95% CI: 1.20, 2.03]; p = .001). CONCLUSION: Combined cell-cycle risk and cell cycle progression scores predict metastases and disease-specific mortality post-radical prostatectomy and should help identify patients at greatest risk of treatment failure who might benefit from earlier intervention.

Prognostic capabilities and clinical utility of cell cycle progression testing, prostate imaging reporting and data system, version 2, and clinicopathologic data in management of localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the prognostic capabilities and clinical utility of the cell cycle progression (CCP) gene expression classifier test, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scoring, and clinicopathologic data in select prostate cancer (PCa) medical management scenarios. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective, observational analysis of patients (N = 222) ascertained sequentially from a single urology practice from January 2015 to June 2018. Men were included if they had localized PCa, a CCP score, and an mpMRI PI-RADS v2 score. Cohort 1 (n = 156): men with newly diagnosed PCa, with or without a previous negative biopsy. Cohort 2 (n = 66): men who initiated active surveillance (AS) without CCP testing, but who received the test during AS. CCP was combined with the UCSF Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score to produce a clinical cell-cycle risk (CCR) score, which was reported in the context of a validated AS threshold. Spearman's rank correlation test was used to evaluate correlations between variables. Generalized linear models were used to predict binary Gleason score category and medical management selection (AS or curative therapy). Likelihood-ratio tests were used to determine predictor significance in both univariable and multivariable models. RESULTS: In the combined cohorts, modest but significant correlations were observed between PI-RADS score and CCP (rs = 0.22, P = 8.1 × 10-4), CAPRA (rs= 0.36, P = 4.8 × 10-8), or CCR (rs = 0.37, P = 2.0 × 10-8), suggesting that much of the prognostic information captured by these measures is independent. When accounting for CAPRA and PI-RADS score, CCP was a significant predictor of higher-grade tumor after radical prostatectomy, with the resected tumor approximately 4 times more likely to harbor Gleason ≥4+3 per 1-unit increase in CCP in Cohort 1 (Odds Ratio [OR], 4.10 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46, 14.12], P = 0.006) and in the combined cohorts (OR, 3.72 [95% CI, 1.39, 11.88], P = 0.008). On multivariable analysis, PI-RADS score was not a significant predictor of post-radical prostatectomy Gleason score. Both CCP and CCR were significant and independent predictors of AS versus curative therapy in Cohort 1 on multivariable analysis, with each 1-unit increase in score corresponding to an approximately 2-fold greater likelihood of selecting curative therapy (CCP OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.16, 3.94], P = 0.014) (CCR OR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.48, 3.87], P = 1.5 × 10-4). CCR at or below the AS threshold significantly reduced the probability of selecting curative therapy over AS (OR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.13, 0.57], P = 4.4 × 10-4), further validating the clinical utility of the AS threshold. CONCLUSION: CCP was a better predictor of both tumor grade and subsequent patient management than was PI-RADS. Even in the context of targeted biopsy, molecular information remains essential to ensure precise risk assessment for men with newly diagnosed PCa.

Multiple Tissue Biomarkers Independently and Additively Predict Prostate Cancer Pathology Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Distinguishing indolent from aggressive prostate cancer remains a key challenge for decision making regarding prostate cancer management. A growing number of biomarkers are now available to help address this need, but these have rarely been examined together in the same patients to determine their potentially additive value. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether two previously validated plasma markers (transforming growth factor ß1 [TGFß1] and interleukin-6 soluble receptor [IL6-SR]) and two validated tissue scores (the Genomic Evaluators of Metastatic Prostate Cancer [GEMCaP] and cell cycle progression [CCP] scores) can improve on clinical parameters in predicting adverse pathology after prostatectomy, and how much they vary within tumors with heterogeneous Gleason grade. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A case-control study was conducted among men with low-risk cancers defined by biopsy grade group (GG) 1, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤10 ng/mL, and clinical stage ≤ T2 who underwent immediate prostatectomy. We collected paraffin-fixed prostatectomy tissue and presurgical plasma samples from 381 cases from the University of California, San Francisco, and 260 cases from the University of Washington. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Pathologic outcomes were minor upgrading/upstaging (GG 2 or pT3a) or major upgrading/upstaging (GG ≥ 3 or ≥ pT3b), and multinomial regression was performed to determine putative markers' ability to predict these outcomes, controlling for PSA, percent of positive biopsy cores, age, and clinical site. For upgraded tumors, a secondary analysis of the GEMCaP and CCP scores from the higher-grade tumor was also performed to evaluate for heterogeneity. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 357 men had no upgrading/upstaging event at prostatectomy, 236 had a minor event, and 67 had a major event. Neither TGFß1 nor IL6-SR was statistically significantly associated with any upgrading/upstaging. On the contrary, both the CCP and the GEMCaP score obtained from Gleason pattern 3 tissue were directly associated with minor and major upgrading/upstaging on univariate analysis. The two scores correlated with each other, but weakly. On multinomial analysis including both scores in the model, the CCP score predicted minor upgrading/upstaging (odds ratio [OR] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.49) and major upgrading/upstaging (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.05-4.90), p =  0.04), and the GEMCaP score also predicted minor upgrading/upstaging (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08) and major upgrading/upstaging (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04-1.11), p <  0.01). The other clinical parameters were not significant in this model. Among upgraded tumors including both Gleason patterns 3 and 4, both the GEMCaP and the CCP score tended to be higher from the higher-grade tumor. The main limitation was the use of virtual biopsies from prostatectomy tissue as surrogates for prostate biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker signatures based on analyses of both DNA and RNA significantly and independently predict adverse pathology among men with clinically low-risk prostate cancer undergoing prostatectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Validated biomarker scores derived from both prostate cancer DNA and prostate cancer RNA can add independent information to help predict outcomes after prostatectomy.

Biopsy Cell Cycle Proliferation Score Predicts Adverse Surgical Pathology in Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Active surveillance (AS) is an accepted management strategy for some patients with renal cell carcinoma, but limited tools are available to identify optimal AS candidates. While renal mass biopsy provides diagnostic information, risk stratification based on biopsy is limited. In a retrospective, multi-institutional cohort that underwent renal mass biopsy followed by surgery, we assessed the ability of the cell cycle proliferation (CCP) score from clinical biopsy specimens to predict adverse surgical pathology (ie, grade 3-4, pT stage ≥3, metastasis at surgery, or papillary type II). Of 202 patients, 98 (49%) had adverse surgical pathology. When added to a baseline model including age, sex, race, lesion size, biopsy grade, and histology, CCP score was significantly associated with adverse pathology when modeled as a binary (odds ratio [OR]: 2.44 for CCP score >0, p = 0.02) and a continuous (OR: 1.72 per one unit increase, p = 0.04) variable. Discriminative performance measured by the area under the curve (AUC) improved from 0.73 in the baseline model to 0.75 and 0.76 in models including the CCP score. In the subgroup of patients with nephrectomy CCP score available (n = 67), the biopsy-based model outperformed the nephrectomy-based model (AUC 0.78 vs 0.75). These data support prospective assessment of biopsy CCP score to confirm clinical validity and assess potential utility in AS-eligible patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In patients with localized renal cell carcinoma who underwent renal mass biopsy followed by surgery, the cell cycle proliferation score from clinical biopsy specimens could predict adverse surgical pathology.

Analysis of the prognostic utility of the cell cycle progression (CCP) score generated from needle biopsy in men treated with definitive therapy.

BACKGROUND: Accurate risk stratification can help guide appropriate treatment decisions in men with localized prostate cancer. Here, we evaluated the independent ability of the molecular cell cycle progression (CCP) score and the combined cell-cycle clinical risk (CCR) score to predict 10-year risk of progression to metastatic disease in a large, pooled analysis of men with definitively treated prostate cancer. METHODS: The pooled analysis included 1,062 patients from four institutions (Martini Clinic, Durham VA Medical Center, Intermountain Healthcare, Ochsner Clinic) treated definitively for localized prostate cancer by either radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy (brachytherapy or external beam radiotherapy ± hormone therapy). The CCP score was determined using the RNA expression of 46 genes from archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded biopsy tissue. The CCR score was calculated using a predefined linear combination of the CCP score and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score. The scores were evaluated for association with 10-year risk of metastatic disease following definitive therapy after adjusting for other clinical variables. RESULTS: The CCP score was strongly associated with 10-year risk of metastatic disease in multivariable analysis [Hazard Ratio per unit score = 2.21; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64, 2.98; p = 1.9 × 10-6] after adjusting for CAPRA, treatment type, and cohort. CCR was also highly prognostic (Hazard Ratio per unit score = 4.00; 95% CI 2.95, 5.42; p = 6.3 × 10-21). There was no evidence of interaction between CCP or CCR and cohort (p = 0.79 and p = 0.86, respectively) or treatment type (p = 0.55 and p = 0.78, respectively). Observed patient CCR-based predicted risks for metastatic disease by 10 years ranged from 0.1 to 99.4%, (IQR 0.7%, 4.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Both CCP and CCR scores provided independent prognostic information for predicting progression to metastatic disease after both surgery and radiation. These results further demonstrate their potential use as a risk stratification tool in patients with newly-diagnosed prostate cancer.

Clinical outcomes in men with prostate cancer who selected active surveillance using a clinical cell cycle risk score.

Aim: To evaluate active surveillance (AS) selection, safety and durability among men with low-risk prostate cancer assessed using the clinical cell cycle risk (CCR) score, a combined clinical and molecular score. Patients & methods: Initial treatment selection (AS vs treatment) and duration of AS were evaluated for men with low-risk prostate cancer according to the CCR score and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Adverse events included biochemical recurrence and metastasis. Results: 82.4% (547/664) of men initially selected AS (median follow-up: 2.2 years), 0.4% (2/547) of whom experienced an adverse event. Two-thirds of patients remained on AS for more than 3 years; patient choice was the most common reason for leaving AS. Conclusion: The CCR score may aid in the identification of men who can safely defer prostate cancer treatment.

Extracapsular extension on MRI indicates a more aggressive cell cycle progression genotype of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To explore associations between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features of prostate cancer and expression levels of cell cycle genes, as assessed by the Prolaris® test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 118 PCa patients with genetic testing of biopsy specimen and prostate MRI from 08/2013 to 11/2015. Associations between the cell cycle risk (CCR) score and MRI features [i.e., PI-RADSv2 score, extracapsular extension (ECE), quantitative metrics] were analyzed with Fisher's exact test, nonparametric tests, and Spearman's correlation coefficient. In 41 patients (34.7%), test results were compared to unfavorable features on prostatectomy specimen (i.e., Gleason group ≥ 3, ECE, lymph node metastases). RESULTS: Fifty-four (45.8%), 60 (50.8%), and 4 (3.4%) patients had low-, intermediate-, and high-risk cancers according to American Urological Association scoring system. Patients with ECE on MRI had significantly higher mean CCR scores (reader 1: 3.9 vs. 3.2, p = 0.015; reader 2: 3.6 vs. 3.2, p = 0.045). PI-RADSv2 scores and quantitative MRI features were not associated with CCR scores. In the prostatectomy subset, ECE on MRI (p = < 0.001-0.001) and CCR scores (p = 0.049) were significantly associated with unfavorable histopathologic features. CONCLUSION: The phenotypic trait of ECE on MRI indicates a more aggressive genotype of prostate cancer.

Comparison of the Prognostic Utility of the Cell Cycle Progression Score for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in African American and Non-African American Men with Localized Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Better prostate cancer risk stratification is necessary to inform medical management, especially for African American (AA) men, for whom outcomes are particularly uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of both a cell cycle progression (CCP) score and a clinical cell-cycle risk (CCR) score to predict clinical outcomes in a large cohort of men with prostate cancer highly enriched in an AA patient population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients were diagnosed with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate and treated at The Ochsner Clinic (New Orleans, LA, USA) from January 2006 to December 2011. CCP scores were derived from archival formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded biopsy tissue. CCR scores were calculated as the combination of molecular (CCP score) and clinical (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment [CAPRA] score) components. INTERVENTION: Active treatment (radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy alone, or radiation and hormone therapy) or watchful waiting. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was progression to metastatic disease. Association with outcomes was evaluated via Cox proportional hazards survival analysis and likelihood ratio tests. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The final cohort included 767 men, of whom 281 (36.6%) were AA. After accounting for ancestry, treatment, and CAPRA in multivariable analysis, the CCP score remained a significant predictor of metastatic disease (hazard ratio [HR] 2.04; p<0.001), and there was no interaction with ancestry (p=0.20) or treatment (p=0.09). The CCR score was highly prognostic (HR 3.86; p<0.001), and as with the CCP score, there was no interaction with ancestry (p=0.24) or treatment (p=0.32). Limitations include the retrospective study design and the use of self-reported ancestry information. CONCLUSIONS: A CCR score provided significant prognostic information regardless of ancestry. The findings demonstrate that AA men in this study cohort appear to have similar prostate cancer outcomes to non-AA patients after accounting for all available molecular and clinicopathologic variables. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study we evaluated the ability of a combined molecular and clinical score to predict the progression of localized prostate cancer. We found that the combined molecular and clinical score predicted progression to metastasis regardless of patient ancestry or treatment. This suggests that the combined molecular and clinical score may be a valuable tool for determining the risk of metastasis in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in order to make appropriate treatment decisions.

Identification of men with low-risk biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer as candidates for active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: A combined clinical cell-cycle risk (CCR) score that incorporates prognostic molecular and clinical information has been recently developed and validated to improve prostate cancer mortality (PCM) risk stratification over clinical features alone. As clinical features are currently used to select men for active surveillance (AS), we developed and validated a CCR score threshold to improve the identification of men with low-risk disease who are appropriate for AS. METHODS: The score threshold was selected based on the 90th percentile of CCR scores among men who might typically be considered for AS based on NCCN low/favorable-intermediate risk criteria (CCR = 0.8). The threshold was validated using 10-year PCM in an unselected, conservatively managed cohort and in the subset of the same cohort after excluding men with high-risk features. The clinical effect was evaluated in a contemporary clinical cohort. RESULTS: In the unselected validation cohort, men with CCR scores below the threshold had a predicted mean 10-year PCM of 2.7%, and the threshold significantly dichotomized low- and high-risk disease (P = 1.2 × 10-5). After excluding high-risk men from the validation cohort, men with CCR scores below the threshold had a predicted mean 10-year PCM of 2.3%, and the threshold significantly dichotomized low- and high-risk disease (P = 0.020). There were no prostate cancer-specific deaths in men with CCR scores below the threshold in either analysis. The proportion of men in the clinical testing cohort identified as candidates for AS was substantially higher using the threshold (68.8%) compared to clinicopathologic features alone (42.6%), while mean 10-year predicted PCM risks remained essentially identical (1.9% vs. 2.0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The CCR score threshold appropriately dichotomized patients into low- and high-risk groups for 10-year PCM, and may enable more appropriate selection of patients for AS.

Comparison of cell cycle progression score with two immunohistochemical markers (PTEN and Ki-67) for predicting outcome in prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Previous studies of the cell cycle progression (CCP) score in surgical specimens of prostate cancer (PCa) in patients treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) demonstrated significant association with time to biochemical recurrence (BCR). In this study, we compared the ability of the CCP score and the expression of PTEN or Ki-67 to predict BCR in a cohort of patients treated by RP. Finally, we constructed the best predictive model for BCR, incorporating biomarkers and relevant clinical variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population consisted of 652 PCa patients enrolled in a retrospective cohort and who had RP surgery in French urological centers from 2000 to 2007. RESULTS: Among the 652 patients with CCP scores and complete clinical data, BCR events occurred in 41%, and the median time from surgery to the last follow-up among BCR-free patients was 72 months. In univariate Cox analysis, the continuous CCP score and positive Ki-67 predicted recurrence with a HR of 1.44 (95% CI 1.17-1.75; p = 5.3 × 10-4) and 1.89 (95% CI 1.38-2.57; p = 1.6 × 10-4), respectively. In contrast, PTEN expression was not associated with BCR risk. Of the three biomarkers, only the CCP score remained significantly associated in a multivariable Cox model (p = 0.026). The best model incorporated CAPRA-S and CCP scores as predictors, with HRs of 1.32 and 1.24, respectively. CONCLUSION: The CCP score was superior to the two IHC markers (PTEN and Ki-67) for predicting outcome in PCa after RP.

A Multigene Signature Based on Cell Cycle Proliferation Improves Prediction of Mortality Within 5 Yr of Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There is a critical need for improved prognostic discrimination in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) given the increasing awareness that some patients may be managed with active surveillance, while others with higher-risk disease might benefit from adjuvant therapy following surgery. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a multigene proliferation signature predicts long-term oncologic outcomes in surgically resected RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The cell cycle proliferation (CCP) score was determined after radical nephrectomy for localized clear cell, papillary, or chromophobe RCC in 565 patients. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary end point was disease-specific mortality (DSM), and disease recurrence was a secondary end point. Association with outcomes was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards survival analysis. The CCP score was compared with the Karakiewicz nomogram, and a composite (R-CCP) score was developed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 68 patients (12%) recurred and 32 (6%) died of disease within 5 yr of nephrectomy. The CCP score was an independent predictor of recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-2.09) and DSM (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.53-4.04) after adjusting for clinical variables using the baseline nomogram. The composite R-CCP score gave a Harrell's concordance index of 0.87 and stratified patients into low- (n=338) and high-risk (n=202) categories with 99% and 84% cancer-specific survival probabilities, respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The CCP score is a significant, independent predictor of long-term oncologic outcomes in patients who have undergone nephrectomy for RCC. Combining the molecular classifier with baseline clinical variables allows for accurate, patient-specific risk assessment for use in guiding clinical management. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we sought to understand how well gene expression information from individual kidney tumors can predict cancer recurrence and death following surgical removal. We found that the combination of the gene expression test and clinical characteristics provides an accurate prognostic assessment to help inform clinical decisions.

Prognostic utility of biopsy-derived cell cycle progression score in patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network low-risk prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy: implications for treatment guidance.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prognostic utility of the cell cycle progression (CCP) score in men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-defined low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men who underwent RP for Gleason score ≤6 PCa at three institutions (Martini Clinic [MC], Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center [DVA] and Intermountain Healthcare [IH]) were identified. The CCP score was obtained from diagnostic (DVA, IH) or simulated biopsies (MC). The primary outcome was biochemical recurrence (BCR; prostate-specific antigen ≥0.2 ng/mL) after RP. The prognostic utility of the CCP score was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models in the subset of men meeting NCCN low-risk criteria and in the overall cohort. RESULTS: Among the 236 men identified, 80% (188/236) met the NCCN low-risk criteria. Five-year BCR-free survival for the low (<0), intermediate (0-1) and high (>1) CCP score groups was 89.2%, 80.4%, 64.7%, respectively, in the low-risk cohort (P = 0.03), and 85.9%, 79.1%, 63.1%, respectively, in the overall cohort (P = 0.041). In multivariable models adjusting for clinical and pathological variables with the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score, the CCP score was an independent predictor of BCR in the low-risk (hazard ratio [HR] 1.77 per unit score, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21, 2.58; P = 0.003) and overall cohorts (HR 1.41 per unit score, 95% CI 1.02, 1.96; P = 0.039). CONCLUSION: In a cohort of men with NCCN-defined low-risk PCa, the CCP score improved clinical risk stratification of men who were at increased risk of BCR, which suggests the CCP score could improve the assessment of candidacy for active surveillance and guide optimum treatment selection in these patients with otherwise similar clinical characteristics.

Use of the cell cycle progression (CCP) score for predicting systemic disease and response to radiation of biochemical recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Determining the optimal treatment for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is challenging. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the ability of CCP score (a prognostic RNA expression signature) to discriminate between systemic disease and local recurrence in patients with BCR after RP. METHODS: Sixty patients with BCR after RP were selected for analysis based on: 1) metastatic disease, 2) non-response to salvage external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and 3) durable response to salvage EBRT. CCP scores were generated from the RNA expression of 46 genes. Logistic regression assessed the association between CCP score and patient group. RESULTS: Passing CCP scores were generated for 47 patients with complete clinical and pathologic data. CCP score predicted clinical status when comparing patients with metastatic disease or non-responders to salvage therapy to patients with durable response (p = 0.006). CCP score remained significantly predictive of clinical status after accounting for time to BCR, PSA level at BCR, and Gleason score (p = 0.0031). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated CCP score was associated with increased risk of systemic disease, indicating that CCP score may be useful in identifying patients with BCR who are most likely to benefit from salvage radiation therapy.

Cell cycle progression score predicts metastatic progression of clear cell renal cell carcinoma after resection.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of surgically resected, apparently localized, clear cell renal carcinoma (ccRCC) is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if cell cycle progression (CCP) gene expression can predict future metastasis. METHODS: Pathologic T2a-T3b tumors at University of Iowa were reviewed. Patients with known or suspected metastasis, lymph node involvement or who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant radiation, chemotherapy or immunotherapy were excluded. Case and control cohorts were defined as those who did or did not develop metastatic disease within 5 years. Measured levels of 31 cell cycle genes and 15 control genes from the tumor were calculated as a CCP score. Additionally, gene expression data for a separate ccRCC cohort was downloaded from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). RESULTS: Univariate analysis of 26 cases and 38 controls revealed that the CCP score predicted progression to metastasis (OR 2.65, p = 0.0091). In multivariate logistic regression modeling, CCP expression remained a significant independent predictor for progression (p = 0.026). The CCP score was also significantly associated with distant metastasis in the TCGA renal cancer cohort in both univariate (p = 1.0 × 10-9) and multivariate (p = 5.6 × 10-3) analysis. CONCLUSION: The CCP score has prognostic value in predicting metastatic progression after resection of organ-confined ccRCC.