PI-RADS Version 2.0 Versus Version 2.1: Comparison of Prostate Cancer Gleason Grade Upgrade and Downgrade Rates From MRI-Targeted Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND. Precise risk stratification through MRI/ultrasound (US) fusion-guided targeted biopsy (TBx) can guide optimal prostate cancer (PCa) management. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare PI-RADS version 2.0 (v2.0) and PI-RADS version 2.1 (v2.1) in terms of the rates of International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group (GG) upgrade and downgrade from TBx to radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS. This study entailed a retrospective post hoc analysis of patients who underwent 3-T prostate MRI at a single institution from May 2015 to March 2023 as part of three prospective clinical trials. Trial participants who underwent MRI followed by MRI/US fusion-guided TBx and RP within a 1-year interval were identified. A single genitourinary radiologist performed clinical interpretations of the MRI examinations using PI-RADS v2.0 from May 2015 to March 2019 and PI-RADS v2.1 from April 2019 to March 2023. Upgrade and downgrade rates from TBx to RP were compared using chi-square tests. Clinically significant cancer was defined as ISUP GG2 or greater. RESULTS. The final analysis included 308 patients (median age, 65 years; median PSA density, 0.16 ng/mL2). The v2.0 group (n = 177) and v2.1 group (n = 131) showed no significant difference in terms of upgrade rate (29% vs 22%, respectively; p = .15), downgrade rate (19% vs 21%, p = .76), clinically significant upgrade rate (14% vs 10%, p = .27), or clinically significant downgrade rate (1% vs 1%, p > .99). The upgrade rate and downgrade rate were also not significantly different between the v2.0 and v2.1 groups when stratifying by index lesion PI-RADS category or index lesion zone, as well as when assessed only in patients without a prior PCa diagnosis (all p > .01). Among patients with GG2 or GG3 at RP (n = 121 for v2.0; n = 103 for v2.1), the concordance rate between TBx and RP was not significantly different between the v2.0 and v2.1 groups (53% vs 57%, p = .51). CONCLUSION. Upgrade and downgrade rates from TBx to RP were not significantly different between patients whose MRI examinations were clinically interpreted using v2.0 or v2.1. CLINICAL IMPACT. Implementation of the most recent PI-RADS update did not improve the incongruence in PCa grade assessment between TBx and surgery.

MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: The use of 12-core systematic prostate biopsy is associated with diagnostic inaccuracy that contributes to both overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of prostate cancer. Biopsies performed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeting may reduce the misclassification of prostate cancer in men with MRI-visible lesions. METHODS: Men with MRI-visible prostate lesions underwent both MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy. The primary outcome was cancer detection according to grade group (i.e., a clustering of Gleason grades). Grade group 1 refers to clinically insignificant disease; grade group 2 or higher, cancer with favorable intermediate risk or worse; and grade group 3 or higher, cancer with unfavorable intermediate risk or worse. Among the men who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy, upgrading and downgrading of grade group from biopsy to whole-mount histopathological analysis of surgical specimens were recorded. Secondary outcomes were the detection of cancers of grade group 2 or higher and grade group 3 or higher, cancer detection stratified by previous biopsy status, and grade reclassification between biopsy and radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: A total of 2103 men underwent both biopsy methods; cancer was diagnosed in 1312 (62.4%) by a combination of the two methods (combined biopsy), and 404 (19.2%) underwent radical prostatectomy. Cancer detection rates on MRI-targeted biopsy were significantly lower than on systematic biopsy for grade group 1 cancers and significantly higher for grade groups 3 through 5 (P<0.01 for all comparisons). Combined biopsy led to cancer diagnoses in 208 more men (9.9%) than with either method alone and to upgrading to a higher grade group in 458 men (21.8%). However, if only MRI-target biopsies had been performed, 8.8% of clinically significant cancers (grade group ≥3) would have been misclassified. Among the 404 men who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy, combined biopsy was associated with the fewest upgrades to grade group 3 or higher on histopathological analysis of surgical specimens (3.5%), as compared with MRI-targeted biopsy (8.7%) and systematic biopsy (16.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with MRI-visible lesions, combined biopsy led to more detection of all prostate cancers. However, MRI-targeted biopsy alone underestimated the histologic grade of some tumors. After radical prostatectomy, upgrades to grade group 3 or higher on histopathological analysis were substantially lower after combined biopsy. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; Trio Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00102544.).

Comparison of MRI-Based Staging and Pathologic Staging for Predicting Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND. Currently most clinical models for predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after radical prostatectomy (RP) incorporate staging information from RP specimens, creating a gap in preoperative risk assessment. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare the utility of presurgical staging information from MRI and postsurgical staging information from RP pathology in predicting BCR in patients with PCa. METHODS. This retrospective study included 604 patients (median age, 60 years) with PCa who underwent prostate MRI before RP from June 2007 to December 2018. A single genitourinary radiologist assessed MRI examinations for extraprostatic extension (EPE) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) during clinical interpretations. The utility of EPE and SVI on MRI and RP pathology for BCR prediction was assessed through Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses. Established clinical BCR prediction models, including the University of California San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (UCSF-CAPRA) model and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical (CAPRA-S) model, were evaluated in a subset of 374 patients with available Gleason grade groups from biopsy and RP pathology; two CAPRA-MRI models (CAPRA-S model with modifications to replace RP pathologic staging features with MRI staging features) were also assessed. RESULTS. Univariable predictors of BCR included EPE on MRI (HR = 3.6), SVI on MRI (HR = 4.4), EPE on RP pathology (HR = 5.0), and SVI on RP pathology (HR = 4.6) (all p < .001). Three-year BCR-free survival (RFS) rates for patients without versus with EPE were 84% versus 59% for MRI and 89% versus 58% for RP pathology, and 3-year RFS rates for patients without versus with SVI were 82% versus 50% for MRI and 83% versus 54% for RP histology (all p < .001). For patients with T3 disease on RP pathology, 3-year RFS rates were 67% and 41% for patients without and with T3 disease on MRI. AUCs of CAPRA models, including CAPRA-MRI models, ranged from 0.743 to 0.778. AUCs were not significantly different between CAPRA-S and CAPRA-MRI models (p > .05). RFS rates were significantly different between low- and intermediate-risk groups for only CAPRA-MRI models (80% vs 51% and 74% vs 44%; both p < .001). CONCLUSION. Presurgical MRI-based staging features perform comparably to postsurgical pathologic staging features for predicting BCR. CLINICAL IMPACT. MRI staging can preoperatively identify patients at high BCR risk, helping to inform early clinical decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00026884 and NCT02594202.

Why Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy Miss Clinically Significant Cancer?

PURPOSE: Multiple studies demonstrate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy detects more clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy; however, some clinically significant cancers are detected by systematic biopsy only. While these events are rare, we sought to perform a retrospective analysis of these cases to ascertain the reasons that MRI-targeted biopsy missed clinically significant cancer which was subsequently detected on systematic prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a prospective study comparing cancer detection rates by transrectal MRI-targeted fusion biopsy and systematic 12-core biopsy. Patients with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA), abnormal digital rectal examination, or imaging findings concerning for prostate cancer underwent prostate MRI and subsequent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy in the same setting. The subset of patients with grade group (GG) ≥3 cancer found on systematic biopsy and GG ≤2 cancer (or no cancer) on MRI-targeted biopsy was classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. A retrospective analysis of the MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy real-time screen captures determined the cause of MRI-targeted biopsy miss. Multivariable logistic regression analysis compared baseline characteristics of patients with MRI-targeted biopsy misses to GG-matched patients whose clinically significant cancer was detected by MRI-targeted biopsy. RESULTS: Over the study period of 2007 to 2019, 2,103 patients met study inclusion criteria and underwent combined MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsies. A total of 41 (1.9%) men were classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. Most MRI-targeted biopsy misses were due to errors in lesion targeting (21, 51.2%), followed by MRI-invisible lesions (17, 40.5%) and MRI lesions missed by the radiologist (3, 7.1%). On logistic regression analysis, lower Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSTM) score was associated with having clinically significant cancer missed on MRI-targeted biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: While uncommon, most MRI-targeted biopsy misses are due to errors in lesion targeting, which highlights the importance of accurate co-registration and targeting when using software-based fusion platforms. Additionally, some patients will harbor MRI-invisible lesions which are untargetable by MRI-targeted platforms. The presence of a low PI-RADS score despite a high PSA is suggestive of harboring an MRI-invisible lesion.

Association of Serum Carotenoids and Retinoids with Intraprostatic Inflammation in Men without Prostate Cancer or Clinical Indication for Biopsy in the Placebo Arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

Non-supplemental carotenoids and retinol may potentiate antioxidant and anti-inflammatory mechanisms. Chronic intraprostatic inflammation is linked to prostate carcinogenesis. We investigated the association of circulating carotenoids and retinol with intraprostatic inflammation in benign tissue. We included 235 men from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial placebo arm who had a negative end-of-study biopsy, most (92.8%) done without clinical indication. α-carotene, ß-carotene, ß-cryptoxanthin, lycopene, and retinol were assessed by high-performance liquid chromatography using pooled year 1 and 4 serum. Presence and extent of intraprostatic inflammation in benign tissue was assessed in 3 (of 6-10) biopsy cores. Logistic (any core with inflammation vs none) and polytomous logistic (some or all cores with inflammation vs none) regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of intraprostatic inflammation by concentration tertile adjusting for age, race, prostate cancer family history, and serum cholesterol. None of the carotenoids or retinol was associated with intraprostatic inflammation, except ß-cryptoxanthin, which appeared to be positively associated with any core with inflammation [vs none, T2: OR (95% CI) = 2.67 (1.19, 5.99); T3: 1.80 (0.84, 3.82), P-trend = 0.12]. These findings suggest that common circulating carotenoids and retinol are not useful dietary intervention targets for preventing prostate cancer via modulating intraprostatic inflammation.

A phase II randomized placebo-controlled trial of pomegranate fruit extract in men with localized prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance.

INTRODUCTION OR OBJECTIVE: Men with favorable-risk prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance may benefit from intervention strategies to slow or prevent disease progression and the need for definitive treatment. Pomegranate and its extracts have shown antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in cell lines and animal models, but its effect on human prostate cancer as a target tissue remain unclear. Objectives of this trial include pomegranate's ability to alter serum and prostate tissue biomarkers and the ability of an active surveillance cohort to adhere to a chemoprevention trial for 1 year. METHODS: Men with organ-confined, favorable-risk PCa on AS were randomly assigned to receive pomegranate fruit extract (PFE) 1000 mg (n = 15) or placebo (n = 15) once daily for twelve months. Prostate biopsies were performed at study entry and upon completion of the 1-year intervention. Plasma and urinary biomarkers were analyzed utilizing immunoassays and HPLC. Tissue proteins were assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and measured by automated quantitation. RESULTS: PFE was well-tolerated with no significant toxicities. One patient withdrew before study initiation and 29 completed the 1-year intervention. No differences in plasma insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) levels, prostate-specific antigen doubling time, or biopsy kinetics were observed. Metabolites including urolithin A and urolithin A-gluc were detected more frequently in the PFE arm in both urine and plasma (p < .001 and p = .006, respectively). IHC analyses revealed reductions from baseline in 8-OHdG (a DNA damage marker) (p = .01) and androgen receptor expression (p = .04) in prostate tumor associated with PFE treatment. CONCLUSION: PFE administration for 12-month was well-tolerated and the protocol followed in an active surveillance population. Analyses suggest that PFE contains bioactive compounds capable of altering biomarkers involving oxidative stress and androgen signaling in prostate tumor and normal-appearing adjacent tissue. No alterations in the IGF axis were noted. This finding of study adherence and target activity provides a rationale for the further investigation of PFE in the active surveillance population.

Other and All-Cause Mortality among Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer in the PLCO Trial.

PURPOSE: Men with prostate cancer have high cause-specific survival, and most deaths are from other causes. This study aimed to investigate other and all-cause mortality in a large cancer screening cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian) Cancer Screening Trial cohort, we selected men diagnosed with prostate cancer from 1994-2014. We examined other and all-cause survival by prostate cancer risk level, defined as the D'Amico categories for localized disease (low, intermediate and high risk) plus nonlocalized disease. We developed 3 Cox proportional hazards models to assess the relationship between risk level and survival. Model I controlled for age, race, study arm and diagnosis year. Model II additionally controlled for other demographic and medical history factors. Model III additionally controlled for initial treatment. RESULTS: Of 76,672 men in PLCO and 10,859 prostate cancer cases, 9,248 (85.2%) had known prostate cancer risk level (mean±SD age 70.4±6.2 years). Median followup time from diagnosis was 10.8 years (IQR 6.8-15.0). Of 3,318 deaths 81% were from other causes. Compared to the low risk group, other-cause mortality HRs were 1.13 (95% CI 1.04-1.23), 1.35 (95% CI 1.21-1.50) and 1.63 (95% CI 1.35-1.97) for intermediate risk, high risk and advanced disease, respectively, in model II. Model III HRs were similar to model II except for advanced disease, where the HR decreased to 1.35. CONCLUSIONS: Other-cause survival was greater in lower vs higher risk disease, even after controlling for lifestyle characteristics and comorbidities. Further research is needed to identify factors contributing to this higher other-cause mortality to help mitigate the risk.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Detection of Grade Progression in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance for patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancers is becoming a more utilized option in recent years. However, the use of magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy for monitoring grade progression has been poorly studied in this population. We aim to define the utility of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy in an active surveillance population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 2007 and January 2020, patients with diagnosed prostate cancer who elected active surveillance were monitored with prostate magnetic resonance imaging, imaging-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy. Patients were eligible for surveillance if diagnosed with any volume Gleason grade 1 disease and select Gleason grade 2 disease. Grade progression (Gleason grade 1 to ≥2 disease and Gleason grade 2 to ≥3 disease) for each biopsy modality was measured at 2 years, 4 years and 6+ years. RESULTS: In total, 369 patients had both magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy and were surveilled for at least 1 year. At 2 years, systematic biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and combined biopsy (systematic+imaging-targeted) detected grade progression in 44 patients (15.9%), 73 patients (26.4%) and 90 patients (32.5%), respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected more cancer grade progression compared to systematic biopsy in both the low and intermediate risk populations (p <0.001). Of all 90 grade progressions at the 2-year time point 46 (51.1%) were found by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy alone and missed by systematic biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected significantly more grade progressions in our active surveillance cohort compared to systematic biopsy at 2 years. Our results provide compelling evidence that prostate magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy should be included in contemporary active surveillance protocols.

The Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression in Active Surveillance Patients with Bilateral Disease Detected by Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Fusion and Systematic Biopsy.

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate whether bilateral prostate cancer detected at active surveillance (AS) enrollment is associated with progression to Grade Group (GG) ≥2 and to compare the efficacy of combined targeted biopsy plus systematic biopsy (Cbx) vs systematic biopsy (Sbx) or targeted biopsy alone to detect bilateral disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients referred to our institution from 2007-2020 was queried. The study cohort included all AS patients with GG1 on confirmatory Cbx and followup of at least 1 year. Cox proportional hazard analysis identified baseline characteristics associated with progression to ≥GG2 at any point throughout followup. RESULTS: Of 579 patients referred, 103 patients had GG1 on Cbx and were included in the study; 49/103 (47.6%) patients progressed to ≥GG2, with 30/72 (41.7%) patients with unilateral disease progressing and 19/31 (61.3%) patients with bilateral disease progressing. Median time to progression was 68 months vs 52 months for unilateral and bilateral disease, respectively (p=0.006). Both prostate specific antigen density (HR 1.72, p=0.005) and presence of bilateral disease (HR 2.21, p=0.012) on confirmatory biopsy were associated with AS progression. At time of progression, GG and risk group were significantly higher in patients with bilateral versus unilateral disease. Cbx detected 16% more patients with bilateral disease than Sbx alone. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral disease and prostate specific antigen density at confirmatory Cbx conferred greater risk of earlier AS progression. Cbx was superior to Sbx for identifying bilateral disease. AS risk-stratification protocols may benefit from including presence of bilateral disease and should use Cbx to detect bilateral disease.

Adherence with protocol medication use and mortality from unrelated causes in a prevention trial.

Several studies have shown that non-adherence to medication use is associated with lower use of preventive services and increased mortality. We aimed to study the relationship between initial adherence to medication use and mortality in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT). The PCPT randomized men age 55 and over to a finasteride or placebo arm. Duration of treatment was seven years, followed by end-of-study prostate biopsy. Extended follow-up for mortality was performed by linkage to the National Death Index. Non-adherence was defined as taking under 80% of required pills during the first or second 6-month trial period. Proportional hazards models were used to assess the relationship between adherence and all-cause mortality (excluding prostate cancer deaths). Three models were developed as follows: Model I (controlling for demographics and trial arm), Model II (Model I factors plus specific medical conditions), Model III (Model II factors plus lifestyle factors). Of 18,667 men included in the analysis, 3082 (16.5%) were non-adherent. The most common reasons for non-adherence were side effects (33.9%) and forgetting to take pills (22%). Through 5 and 10 years of follow-up, 178 (5.9%) and 483 (15.7%) non-adherent men died versus 581 (3.7%) and 1887 (12.1%) adherent men. Hazard ratios (HRs) at 5 years were 1.62 (95% CI: 1.37-1.91), 1.55 (95% CI: 1.30-1.83) and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.25-1.76) for Models I-III. HRs at ten years were lower but still statistically significant. Non-adherence to taking protocol medications was associated with increased mortality from unrelated conditions.

Cabozantinib in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma: an open-label, single-centre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is a multikinase inhibitor of MET, VEGFR, AXL, and RET, which also has an effect on the tumour immune microenvironment by decreasing regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells. In this study, we examined the activity of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic platinum-refractory urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: This study was an open-label, single-arm, three-cohort phase 2 trial done at the National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD, USA). Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had histologically confirmed urothelial carcinoma or rare genitourinary tract histologies, Karnofsky performance scale index of 60% or higher, and documented disease progression after at least one previous line of platinum-based chemotherapy (platinum-refractory). Cohort one included patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with measurable disease as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Two additional cohorts that enrolled in parallel (patients with bone-only urothelial carcinoma metastases and patients with rare histologies of the genitourinary tract) were exploratory. Patients received cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate by RECIST in cohort one. Response was assessed in all patients who met the eligibility criteria and who received at least 8 weeks of therapy. All patients who received at least one dose of cabozantinib were included in the safety analysis. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01688999. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2012, and Oct, 20, 2015, 68 patients were enrolled on the study (49 in cohort one, six in cohort two, and 13 in cohort three). All patients received at least one dose of cabozantinib. The median follow-up was 61·2 months (IQR 53·8-70·0) for the 57 patients evaluable for response. In the 42 evaluable patients in cohort one, there was one complete response and seven partial responses (objective response rate 19%, 95% CI 9-34). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were fatigue (six [9%] patients), hypertension (five [7%]), proteinuria (four [6%]), and hypophosphataemia (four [6%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib has single-agent clinical activity in patients with heavily pretreated, platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma with measurable disease and bone metastases and is generally well tolerated. Cabozantinib has innate and adaptive immunomodulatory properties providing a rationale for combining cabozantinib with immunotherapeutic strategies. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute Intramural Program and the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program.

The association between serum sex steroid hormone concentrations and intraprostatic inflammation in men without prostate cancer and irrespective of clinical indication for biopsy in the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

BACKGROUND: Intraprostatic inflammation is an emerging prostate cancer risk factor. Estrogens are pro-inflammatory while androgens are anti-inflammatory. Thus, we investigated whether serum sex steroid hormone concentrations are associated with intraprostatic inflammation to inform mechanistic links among hormones, inflammation, and prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among 247 men in the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial who had a negative end-of-study biopsy, most (92.7%) performed without clinical indication per trial protocol. Serum estradiol, estrone, and testosterone were previously measured by immunoassay in pooled baseline and Year 3 serum. Free estradiol and free testosterone were calculated. Inflammation was visually assessed (median of three prostate biopsy cores per man). Polytomous or logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of some or all cores inflamed (both vs none) or any core inflamed (vs none) by hormone tertile, adjusting for age, race, and family history. We evaluated effect modification by waist circumference and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: In all, 51.4% had some and 26.3% had all cores inflamed. Free (P-trend = .11) but not total estradiol was suggestively inversely associated with all cores inflamed. In men with waist circumference greater than or equal to 102 cm (P-trend = .021) and BMI ≥ 27.09 kg/m2 (P-trend = .0037) free estradiol was inversely associated with any core inflamed. Estrone was inversely associated with all cores inflamed (T3: OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.95, P-trend = .036). Total (T3: OR = 1.91, 95% CI 0.91-4.02, P-trend = .11) and free (T3: OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.01-4.74, P-trend = .05) testosterone were positively associated with any core inflamed, especially free testosterone in men with waist circumference less than 102 cm (T3: OR = 3.51, 95% CI 1.03-12.11, P-trend = .05). CONCLUSIONS: In this first study in men without prostate cancer and irrespective of clinical indication for biopsy, contrary to the hypothesis, circulating estrogens appeared to be inversely associated, especially in heavy men, whereas androgens appeared to be positively associated with intraprostatic inflammation.

Metastatic prostate cancer at diagnosis and through progression in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial assessed the effect of screening with prostate-specific antigen and a digital rectal examination on prostate cancer mortality. Another endpoint of interest was the burden of total metastatic disease. METHODS: All men in PLCO were assessed for metastatic prostate cancer at diagnosis; men with clinical stage I/II disease were assessed for metastatic progression. The rate of total metastatic disease was defined as metastases found either at diagnosis or through progression divided by person-years (PYs) of follow-up for all men in the trial. Metastatic progression rates were computed among men with clinical stage I/II prostate cancer. Survival among men with metastases at diagnosis was compared with survival among men with metastatic progression. RESULTS: Among 38,340 men in the intervention arm and 38,343 men in the control arm in PLCO, there were 4974 and 4699 prostate cancer cases, respectively. The rates of total metastatic disease were 4.72 and 4.83 per 10,000 PYs in the intervention and control arms, respectively (rate ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.18). The rates of metastatic progression among men with clinical stage I/II prostate cancer were 43.7 and 50.5 per 10,000 PYs in the intervention and control arms, respectively (P = .30). Prostate cancer-specific 5- and 10-year survival rates were significantly worse for men with metastatic progression (24% and 19%, respectively) than men with metastases at diagnosis (40% and 26%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of total metastatic disease and metastatic progression were similar across arms in PLCO. Survival was worse for men with metastatic progression in comparison with those with metastatic disease at diagnosis.

Predicting Gleason Group Progression for Men on Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Role of a Negative Confirmatory Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance has gained acceptance as an alternative to definitive therapy in many men with prostate cancer. Confirmatory biopsies to assess the appropriateness of active surveillance are routinely performed and negative biopsies are regarded as a favorable prognostic indicator. We sought to determine the prognostic implications of negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound guided fusion biopsy consisting of extended sextant, systematic biopsy plus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients referred with Gleason Grade Group 1 or 2 prostate cancer based on systematic biopsy performed elsewhere underwent confirmatory fusion biopsy. Patients who continued on active surveillance after a positive or a negative fusion biopsy were followed. The baseline characteristics of the biopsy negative and positive cases were compared. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the prognostic significance of a negative fusion biopsy. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate Grade Group progression with time. RESULTS: Of the 542 patients referred with Grade Group 1 (466) or Grade Group 2 (76) cancer 111 (20.5%) had a negative fusion biopsy. A total of 60 vs 122 patients with a negative vs a positive fusion biopsy were followed on active surveillance with a median time to Grade Group progression of 74.3 and 44.6 months, respectively (p <0.01). Negative fusion biopsy was associated with a reduced risk of Grade Group progression (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.77, p <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A negative confirmatory fusion biopsy confers a favorable prognosis for Grade Group progression. These results can be used when counseling patients about the risk of progression and for planning future followup and biopsies in patients on active surveillance.

Use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and fusion-guided biopsies to properly select and follow African-American men on active surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of Gleason Grade Group (GGG) upgrading in African-American (AA) men with a prior diagnosis of low-grade prostate cancer (GGG 1 or GGG 2) on 12-core systematic biopsy (SB) after multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and fusion biopsy (FB); and whether AA men who continued active surveillance (AS) after mpMRI and FB fared differently than a predominantly Caucasian (non-AA) population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A database of men who had undergone mpMRI and FB was queried to determine rates of upgrading by FB amongst men deemed to be AS candidates based on SB prior to referral. After FB, Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for AA men and non-AA men who then elected AS. The time to GGG upgrading and time continuing AS were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: AA men referred with GGG 1 disease on previous SB were upgraded to GGG ≥3 by FB more often than non-AA men, 22.2% vs 12.7% (P = 0.01). A total of 32 AA men and 258 non-AA men then continued AS, with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 39.19 (24.24-56.41) months. The median time to progression was 59.7 and 60.5 months, respectively (P = 0.26). The median time continuing AS was 61.9 months and not reached, respectively (P = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: AA men were more likely to be upgraded from GGG 1 on SB to GGG ≥3 on initial FB; however, AA and non-AA men on AS subsequently progressed at similar rates following mpMRI and FB. A greater tendency for SB to underestimate tumour grade in AA men may explain prior studies that have shown AA men to be at higher risk of progression during AS.

Association between variants in genes involved in the immune response and prostate cancer risk in men randomized to the finasteride arm in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

BACKGROUND: We reported that some, but not all single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in select immune response genes are associated with prostate cancer, but not individually with the prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) placebo arm. Here, we investigated whether these same SNPs are associated with risk of lower- and higher-grade prostate cancer in men randomized to finasteride, and with prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation among controls. Methods A total of 16 candidate SNPs in IL1ß, IL2, IL4, IL6, IL8, IL10, IL12(p40), IFNG, MSR1, RNASEL, TLR4, and TNFA and 7 tagSNPs in IL10 were genotyped in 625 white prostate cancer cases, and 532 white controls negative for cancer on an end-of-study biopsy nested in the PCPT finasteride arm. We used logistic regression to estimate log-additive odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusting for age and family history. RESULTS: Minor alleles of rs2243250 (T) in IL4 (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.03-2.08, P-trend = 0.03), rs1800896 (G) in IL10 (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.96, P-trend = 0.02), rs2430561 (A) in IFNG (OR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.02-1.74; P-trend = 0.04), rs3747531 (C) in MSR1 (OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.95; P-trend = 0.03), and possibly rs4073 (A) in IL8 (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.64-1.01, P-trend = 0.06) were associated with higher- (Gleason 7-10; N = 222), but not lower- (Gleason 2-6; N = 380) grade prostate cancer. In men with low PSA (<2 ng/mL), these higher-grade disease associations were attenuated and/or no longer significant, whereas associations with higher-grade disease were apparent for minor alleles of rs1800795 (C: OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.51-0.94, P-trend = 0.02) and rs1800797 (A: OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.98, P-trend = 0.04) in IL6. While some IL10 tagSNPs were associated with lower- and higher-grade prostate cancer, distributions of IL10 haplotypes did not differ, except possibly between higher-grade cases and controls among those with low PSA (P = 0.07). We did not observe an association between the studied SNPs and intraprostatic inflammation in the controls. CONCLUSION: In the PCPT finasteride arm, variation in genes involved in the immune response, including possibly IL8 and IL10 as in the placebo arm, may be associated with prostate cancer, especially higher-grade disease, but not with intraprostatic inflammation. We cannot rule out PSA-associated detection bias or chance due to multiple testing.