Decipher test impacts decision making among patients considering adjuvant and salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy: Interim results from the Multicenter Prospective PRO-IMPACT study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer and their providers face uncertainty as they consider adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) or salvage radiotherapy (SRT) after undergoing radical prostatectomy. The authors prospectively evaluated the impact of the Decipher test, which predicts metastasis risk after radical prostatectomy, on decision making for ART and SRT. METHODS: A total of 150 patients who were considering ART and 115 who were considering SRT were enrolled. Providers submitted a management recommendation before processing the Decipher test and again at the time of receipt of the test results. Patients completed validated surveys on prostate cancer (PCa)-specific decisional effectiveness and PCa-related anxiety. RESULTS: Before the Decipher test, observation was recommended for 89% of patients considering ART and 58% of patients considering SRT. After Decipher testing, 18% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 12%-25%) of treatment recommendations changed in the ART arm, including 31% among high-risk patients; and 32% (95% CI, 24%-42%) of management recommendations changed in the salvage arm, including 56% among high-risk patients. Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) scores were better after viewing Decipher test results (ART arm: median DCS before Decipher, 25 and after Decipher, 19 [P<.001]; SRT arm: median DCS before Decipher, 27 and after Decipher, 23 [P<.001]). PCa-specific anxiety changed after Decipher testing; fear of PCa disease recurrence in the ART arm (P = .02) and PCa-specific anxiety in the SRT arm (P = .05) decreased significantly among low-risk patients. Decipher results reported per 5% increase in 5-year metastasis probability were associated with the decision to pursue ART (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.19-1.85) and SRT (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.81) in multivariable logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of Decipher test results was associated with treatment decision making and improved decisional effectiveness among men with PCa who were considering ART and SRT. Cancer 2017;123:2850-59. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

A Crossover Design for Comparative Efficacy: A 36-Week Randomized Trial of Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema.

PURPOSE: To investigate the comparative efficacy of bevacizumab (Avastin) and ranibizumab (Lucentis; both Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA) for diabetic macular edema (DME) using a crossover study design. DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, 36-week, 3-period crossover clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-six subjects with DME involving the center of the macula in one or both eyes. METHODS: Monthly intravitreous injections of bevacizumab (1.25 mg) or ranibizumab (0.3 mg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of mean changes in visual acuity and central retinal thickness, tested using a linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: Based on the linear mixed-effects model, the 3-month estimated mean improvement in visual acuity was 5.3 letters for bevacizumab and 6.6 letters for ranibizumab (difference, 1.3 letters; P = 0.039). Estimated change in optical coherence tomography (OCT) central subfield mean thickness (CSMT) was -89 µm for bevacizumab and -137 µm for ranibizumab (difference, 48 µm; P < 0.001). Incorporating cumulative treatment benefit, the model yielded a predicted 36-week (9-month) average improvement in visual acuity of 7.1 letters (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.0-9.2) for bevacizumab and 8.4 letters (95% CI, 6.3-10.5) for ranibizumab, and a change in OCT CSMT of -128 µm (95% CI, -155 to -100) for bevacizumab and -176 µm (95% CI, -202 to -149) for ranibizumab. There was no significant treatment-by-period interaction (i.e., treatment difference was constant in all 3 periods), nor was there a significant differential carryover effect from one period to the next. CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrated a statistically significant but small relative clinical benefit of ranibizumab compared with bevacizumab for treatment of DME, using a markedly reduced sample size relative to a full comparative efficacy study. The effects on visual acuity and central retinal thickness for the 2 drugs are consistent with those reported at 1 year for the concurrent parallel-group trial by the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network testing bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept for DME. The 3-period crossover design allowed for meaningful and efficient comparison, suggesting that this approach may be useful for future comparative efficacy studies of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs for DME.

Best method for right atrial volume assessment by two-dimensional echocardiography: validation with magnetic resonance imaging.

AIM: Echocardiographic methods for estimating right atrial (RA) volume have not been standardized. Our aim was to evaluate two-dimensional (2D) echocardiographic methods of RA volume assessment, using RA volume by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the reference. METHODS AND RESULTS: Right atrial volume was assessed in 51 patients (mean age 63 ± 14 years, 33 female) who underwent comprehensive 2D echocardiography and cardiac MRI for clinically indicated reasons. Echocardiographic RA volume methods included (1) biplane area length, using four-chamber view twice (biplane 4C-4C); (2) biplane area length, using four-chamber and subcostal views (biplane 4C-subcostal); and (3) single plane Simpson's method of disks (Simpson's). Echocardiographic RA volumes as well as linear RA major and minor dimensions were compared to RA volume by MRI using correlation and Bland-Altman methods, and evaluated for inter-observer reproducibility and accuracy in discriminating RA enlargement. All echocardiography volumetric methods performed well compared to MRI, with Pearson's correlation of 0.98 and concordance correlation ≥0.91 for each. For bias and limits of agreement, biplane 4C-4C (bias -4.81 mL/m(2) , limits of agreement ±9.8 mL/m(2) ) and Simpson's (bias -5.15 mL/m(2) , limits of agreement ±10.1 mL/m(2) ) outperformed biplane 4C-subcostal (bias -8.36 mL/m(2) , limits of agreement ±12.5 mL/m(2) ). Accuracy for discriminating RA enlargement was higher for all volumetric methods than for linear measurements. Inter-observer variability was satisfactory across all methods. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to MRI, biplane 4C-4C and single plane Simpson's are highly accurate and reproducible 2D echocardiography methods for estimating RA volume. Linear dimensions are inaccurate and should be abandoned.

Impact of patient use of an online patient portal on diabetes outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of patient use of an online patient portal on diabetes outcomes. METHODS: Patients included were those with diabetes who were newly referred to a Vancouver-based tertiary care diabetologist between April 2008 and October 2012. Each patient was assessed by the diabetologist, received initial diabetes education and was referred, as necessary, for further education and self-management training. All patients who provided an e-mail address at registration were invited to open an online patient portal account. The portal provided access to diabetes education material, personal laboratory values and a messaging system allowing communication with the diabetologist and staff. Patients who logged in 1 or more times were defined as portal users (n=50); patients who never logged in to the portal were defined as non-users (n=107). A1C was measured at 2 time points: at baseline (i.e. initial, in-clinic visit) and at last follow up (visit no less than 6 months and no more than 2 years after the initial visit). Because usership is self-selected, propensity score matching was used to create comparable user/non-user groups based on available baseline covariates. RESULTS: Compared to non-users, a higher proportion of users achieved A1C ≤7% at follow up (56% vs. 32%) (p=0.031). CONCLUSION: Accessing an online patient portal is associated with improved glycemic control.

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.

Genomic Classifier Performance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 Randomized Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: Intermediate-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state with diverse treatment options. The 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (GC) retrospectively has shown to improve risk stratification in these patients. We assessed the performance of the GC in men with intermediate-risk disease enrolled in NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26 with updated follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After National Cancer Institute approval, biopsy slides were collected from NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26, a randomized phase 3 trial of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer randomized to 70.2 Gy versus 79.2 Gy of radiation therapy without androgen deprivation therapy. RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor foci to generate the locked 22-gene GC model. The primary endpoint for this ancillary project was disease progression (composite of biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and use of salvage therapy). Individual endpoints were also assessed. Fine-Gray or cause-specific Cox multivariable models were constructed adjusting for randomization arm and trial stratification factors. RESULTS: Two-hundred fifteen patient samples passed quality control for analysis. The median follow-up was 12.8 years (range, 2.4-17.7). On multivariable analysis, the 22-gene GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently prognostic for disease progression (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.26; P = .04), biochemical failure (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.37; P < .001), distant metastasis (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.55; P = .01), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (sHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.76; P < .001). Ten-year distant metastasis in GC low-risk patients was 4% compared with 16% for GC high-risk patients. In patients with lower GC scores, the 10-year difference in metastasis-free survival rate between arms was -7%, compared with 21% for higher GC patients (P-interaction = .04). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first validation of a biopsy-based gene expression classifier, assessing both its prognostic and predictive value, using data from a randomized phase 3 trial of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Decipher improves risk stratification and can aid in treatment decision-making in men with intermediate-risk disease.

Impact of Decipher on use of post-operative radiotherapy: Individual patient analysis of two prospective registries.

Objective: To assess the association between Genomic Classifier (GC)-risk group and post-radical prostatectomy treatment in clinical practice. Methods: Two prospective observational cohorts of men with prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent RP in two referral centers and had GC testing post-prostatectomy between 2013 and 2018 were included. The primary endpoint of the study was to assess the association between GC-risk group and time to secondary therapy. Univariable (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to assess the association between GC-risk group and time to receipt of secondary therapy after RP, where secondary therapy is defined as receiving either RT or ADT after RP. Results: A total of 398 patients are included in the analysis. Patients with high-GC risk were more likely to receive any secondary therapy (OR: 6.84) compared to patients with low/intermediate-GC risk. The proportion of high-GC risk patients receiving RT at 2 years post-RP was 31.5%, compared to only 6.3% among the low/intermediate-GC risk patients. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that physicians in routine practice used GC to identify high risk patients who might benefit the most from secondary treatment. As such, GC score was independent predictor of receipt of secondary treatment.

Conversion of Central Subfield Thickness Measurements of Diabetic Macular Edema Across Cirrus and Spectralis Optical Coherence Tomography Instruments.

Purpose: Develop equations to convert Cirrus central subfield thickness (CST) to Spectralis CST equivalents and vice versa in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods: The DRCR Retina Network Protocol O data were split randomly to train (70% sample) and validate (30% sample) conversion equations. Data from an independent study (CADME) also validated the equations. Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement between predicted and observed values evaluated the equations. Results: Protocol O included 374 CST scan pairs from 187 eyes (107 participants). The CADME study included 150 scan pairs of 37 eyes (37 participants). Proposed conversion equations are Spectralis = 40.78 + 0.95 × Cirrus and Cirrus = 1.82 + 0.94 × Spectralis regardless of age, sex, or CST. Predicted values were within 10% of observed values in 101 (90%) of Spectralis and 99 (88%) of Cirrus scans in the validation data; and in 136 (91%) of the Spectralis and 148 (99%) of the Cirrus scans in the CADME data. Adjusting for within-eye correlations, 95% of conversions are estimated to be within 17% (95% confidence interval, 14%-21%) of CST on Spectralis and within 22% (95% confidence interval, 18%-28%) of CST on Cirrus. Conclusions: Conversion equations developed in this study allow the harmonization of CST measurements for eyes with DME using a mix of current Cirrus and Spectralis device images. Translational Relevance: The CSTs measured on Cirrus and Spectralis devices are not directly comparable owing to outer boundary segmentation differences. Converting CST values across spectral domain optical coherence tomography instruments should benefit both clinical research and standard care efforts.

Validation of a 22-Gene Genomic Classifier in Patients With Recurrent Prostate Cancer: An Ancillary Study of the NRG/RTOG 9601 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Decipher (Decipher Biosciences Inc) is a genomic classifier (GC) developed to estimate the risk of distant metastasis (DM) after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with prostate cancer. Objective: To validate the GC in the context of a randomized phase 3 trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This ancillary study used RP specimens from the phase 3 placebo-controlled NRG/RTOG 9601 randomized clinical trial conducted from March 1998 to March 2003. The specimens were centrally reviewed, and RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor available in 2019 with a median follow-up of 13 years. Clinical-grade whole transcriptomes from samples passing quality control were assigned GC scores (scale, 0-1). A National Clinical Trials Network-approved prespecified statistical plan included the primary objective of validating the independent prognostic ability of GC for DM, with secondary end points of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS). Data were analyzed from September 2019 to December 2019. Intervention: Salvage radiotherapy (sRT) with or without 2 years of bicalutamide. Main Outcomes and Measures: The preplanned primary end point of this study was the independent association of the GC with the development of DM. Results: In this ancillary study of specimens from a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, GC scores were generated from 486 of 760 randomized patients with a median follow-up of 13 years; samples from a total of 352 men (median [interquartile range] age, 64.5 (60-70) years; 314 White [89.2%] participants) passed microarray quality control and comprised the final cohort for analysis. On multivariable analysis, the GC (continuous variable, per 0.1 unit) was independently associated with DM (hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32; P = .006), PCSM (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.20-1.63; P < .001), and OS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.06-1.29; P = .002) after adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, Gleason score, T stage, margin status, entry prostate-specific antigen, and treatment arm. Although the original planned analysis was not powered to detect a treatment effect interaction by GC score, the estimated absolute effect of bicalutamide on 12-year OS was less when comparing patients with lower vs higher GC scores (2.4% vs 8.9%), which was further demonstrated in men receiving early sRT at a prostate-specific antigen level lower than 0.7 ng/mL (-7.8% vs 4.6%). Conclusions and Relevance: This ancillary validation study of the Decipher GC in a randomized trial cohort demonstrated association of the GC with DM, PCSM, and OS independent of standard clinicopathologic variables. These results suggest that not all men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after surgery benefit equally from the addition of hormone therapy to sRT. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00002874.

Evaluation of the age-related eye disease study clinical lens grading system AREDS report No. 31.

PURPOSE: To examine the grading (interrater) reliability of the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) Clinical Lens Grading System (ARLNS). DESIGN: Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty volunteers (284 eyes). METHODS: Participants with lens opacities of varying severity were independently graded at the slit lamp for cataract severity by 2 examiners (retinal or anterior segment specialists) using the ARLNS, which employs 3 standard photographs of increasing severity for classifying each of the 3 major types of opacity. Lens photographs were taken and graded at a reading center using the more detailed AREDS System for Classifying Cataracts from photographs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Pearson correlation, weighted-kappa, and limits-of-agreement statistics were used to assess the interrater agreement of the gradings. RESULTS: Examinations were performed on 284 lenses (150 participants). Tests of interrater reliability between pairs of clinicians showed substantial agreement between clinicians for cortical and posterior subcapsular opacities and moderate agreement for nuclear opacities. A similar pattern and strength of agreement was present when comparing scores of retinal versus anterior segment specialists. Interrater agreement between clinical and reading center gradings was not as great as inter-clinician agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Interrater agreements were in the moderate to substantial range for the clinical assessment of lens opacities. Inherent differences in cataract classification systems that rely on slit lamp vs photographic assessments of lens opacities may explain some of the disagreement noted between slit lamp and photographic gradings. Given the interrater reliability statistics for clinicians and the simplicity of the grading procedure, ARLNS is presented for use in studies requiring a simple, inexpensive method for detecting the presence and severity of the major types of lens opacities. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any of the materials discussed in this article.