Is active surveillance a suitable option for African American men with prostate cancer? A systemic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Certain patients presenting with either low or very-low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) can represent a therapeutic dilemma for physicians. The oncologic outcomes of active surveillance (AS) for men with very-low-risk PCa are overall excellent. However, there are concerns about AS related to the potential for upgrading or upstaging. The African American (AA) population is under-represented in studies evaluating AS outcomes and this is particularly important because of the unique epidemiology of PCa in AA men. METHODS: A literature review through the Medline database published from 1990 until August 2015 was performed to identify studies reporting outcomes of the AA population with low-risk PCa that underwent either AS or treatment. An additional search for studies on genetic mechanisms involved in development of PCa in AA men was also performed. RESULTS: Eleven studies on pathologic results of AA men who would qualify for AS were identified and in eight of these studies AA race was found to be associated with adverse pathological outcomes such as positive surgical margins, upgrading or upstaging. The other three studies reported no significance in these parameters with respect to race. Five more studies reported outcomes of AS in AA men with different study end points. AA men were mainly found to have a higher rate of disease reclassification subsequent to active treatment. The studies on genetic mechanisms also identified different genetic alterations in the AA population. CONCLUSIONS: AA men with clinically defined low-risk PCa may have either a higher grade or volume of cancer that was not detected on routine evaluation. Therefore, AS among such patients should be approached with caution. We recommend discussing such risks with AA patients with an acknowledgement that existing favorable outcomes noted in largely Caucasian populations may not be applicable to AA patients. We propose a modified evaluation plan for AA patients that includes an early confirmatory biopsy preceded by an magnetic resonance imaging to optimally detect occult cancer foci.

Very-high-risk localized prostate cancer: definition and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes in men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) can vary substantially-some will have excellent cancer-specific survival, whereas others will experience early metastasis even after aggressive local treatments. Current nomograms, which yield continuous risk probabilities, do not separate high-risk PCa into distinct sub-strata. Here, we derive a binary definition of very-high-risk (VHR) localized PCa to aid in risk stratification at diagnosis and selection of therapy. METHODS: We queried the Johns Hopkins radical prostatectomy database to identify 753 men with NCCN high-risk localized PCa (Gleason sum 8-10, PSA >20 ng ml(-1), or clinical stage ≥T3). Twenty-eight alternate permutations of adverse grade, stage and cancer volume were compared by their hazard ratios for metastasis and cancer-specific mortality. VHR criteria with top-ranking hazard ratios were further evaluated by multivariable analyses and inclusion of a clinically meaningful proportion of the high-risk cohort. RESULTS: The VHR cohort was best defined by primary pattern 5 present on biopsy, or ≥5 cores with Gleason sum 8-10, or multiple NCCN high-risk features. These criteria encompassed 15.1% of the NCCN high-risk cohort. Compared with other high-risk men, VHR men were at significantly higher risk for metastasis (hazard ratio 2.75) and cancer-specific mortality (hazard ratio 3.44) (P<0.001 for both). Among high-risk men, VHR men also had significantly worse 10-year metastasis-free survival (37% vs 78%) and cancer-specific survival (62% vs 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Men who meet VHR criteria form a subgroup within the current NCCN high-risk classification who have particularly poor oncological outcomes. Use of these characteristics to distinguish VHR localized PCa may help in counseling and selection optimal candidates for multimodal treatments or clinical trials.

A genomic classifier predicting metastatic disease progression in men with biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Due to their varied outcomes, men with biochemical recurrence (BCR) following radical prostatectomy (RP) present a management dilemma. Here, we evaluate Decipher, a genomic classifier (GC), for its ability to predict metastasis following BCR. METHODS: The study population included 85 clinically high-risk patients who developed BCR after RP. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, weighted Cox proportional hazard models and decision curves were used to compare GC scores to Gleason score (GS), PSA doubling time (PSAdT), time to BCR (ttBCR), the Stephenson nomogram and CAPRA-S for predicting metastatic disease progression. All tests were two-sided with a type I error probability of 5%. RESULTS: GC scores stratified men with BCR into those who would or would not develop metastasis (8% of patients with low versus 40% with high scores developed metastasis, P<0.001). The area under the curve for predicting metastasis after BCR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.76-0.86) for GC, compared to GS 0.64 (0.58-0.70), PSAdT 0.69 (0.61-0.77) and ttBCR 0.52 (0.46-0.59). Decision curve analysis showed that GC scores had a higher overall net benefit compared to models based solely on clinicopathologic features. In multivariable modeling with clinicopathologic variables, GC score was the only significant predictor of metastasis (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: When compared to clinicopathologic variables, GC better predicted metastatic progression among this cohort of men with BCR following RP. While confirmatory studies are needed, these results suggest that use of GC may allow for better selection of men requiring earlier initiation of treatment at the time of BCR.