Validation of the Decipher Test for predicting adverse pathology in candidates for prostate cancer active surveillance.

ABSTACT: BACKGROUND: Many men diagnosed with prostate cancer are active surveillance (AS) candidates. However, AS may be associated with increased risk of disease progression and metastasis due to delayed therapy. Genomic classifiers, e.g., Decipher, may allow better risk-stratify newly diagnosed prostate cancers for AS. METHODS: Decipher was initially assessed in a prospective cohort of prostatectomies to explore the correlation with clinically meaningful biologic characteristics and then assessed in diagnostic biopsies from a retrospective multicenter cohort of 266 men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) very low/low and favorable-intermediate risk prostate cancer. Decipher and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) were compared as predictors of adverse pathology (AP) for which there is universal agreement that patients with long life-expectancy are not suitable candidates for AS (primary pattern 4 or 5, advanced local stage [pT3b or greater] or lymph node involvement). RESULTS: Decipher from prostatectomies was significantly associated with adverse pathologic features (p-values < 0.001). Decipher from the 266 diagnostic biopsies (64.7% NCCN-very-low/low and 35.3% favorable-intermediate) was an independent predictor of AP (odds ratio 1.29 per 10% increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.61, p-value 0.025) when adjusting for CAPRA. CAPRA area under curve (AUC) was 0.57, (95% CI 0.47-0.68). Adding Decipher to CAPRA increased the AUC to 0.65 (95% CI 0.58-0.70). NPV, which determines the degree of confidence in the absence of AP for patients, was 91% (95% CI 87-94%) and 96% (95% CI 90-99%) for Decipher thresholds of 0.45 and 0.2, respectively. Using a threshold of 0.2, Decipher was a significant predictor of AP when adjusting for CAPRA (p-value 0.016). CONCLUSION: Decipher can be applied to prostate biopsies from NCCN-very-low/low and favorable-intermediate risk patients to predict absence of adverse pathologic features. These patients are predicted to be good candidates for active surveillance.

Prostatic Adenocarcinoma With Focal Pleomorphic Giant Cell Features: A Series of 30 Cases.

Prostatic adenocarcinoma with focal pleomorphic giant cell features is rare with the only prior series consisting of 6 cases. From 2005 to 2018, we identified 29 cases from our consult service and 1 case from our own institution. Men ranged in age from 39 to 90 years (median=75.5). Diagnostic specimens consisted of needle biopsies (n=13); transurethral resections (n=7), urethral/bladder biopsies (n=8), radical prostatectomy (n=1), and orchiectomy (n=1). In all cases, there was usual acinar prostatic adenocarcinoma, where the highest grade in all cases was Gleason score 9 to 10 (Grade Group 5). On average, 68% of the involved cores had cancer with a maximum percent of cancer averaging 55%; on average, transurethral resections had 85% of the area involved by cancer. Areas of cancer showing pleomorphic giant cell features were focal (<5%). Two of the needle biopsies showed extraprostatic extension. The radical prostatectomy had seminal vesicle invasion and positive margins with lymphovascular invasion. Prostatic adenocarcinoma with focal pleomorphic giant cell features is always accompanied by extensive usual acinar prostate adenocarcinoma where the highest grade in all cases was Gleason score 9 to 10 (Grade Group 5). Although the pleomorphic component is focal, it can mimic urothelial carcinoma. IHC can be misleading as PSA staining is often negative or focal in both the pleomorphic and usual prostatic adenocarcinoma components. NKX3.1 is the most sensitive prostate marker, but was still focal in 1 usual prostatic adenocarcinoma and negative in 2 pleomorphic components. Prostatic adenocarcinoma with focal pleomorphic giant cell features has a dismal prognosis. In men with no prior diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma and >1-year follow-up, 7/19 (37%) were dead at a median of 8 months after diagnosis. Of the 7 men with a prior history of prostate adenocarcinoma, 4/7 (57%) were dead at a median of 7 months after diagnosis of recurrent prostate adenocarcinoma with pleomorphic giant cell features.

Intraductal/ductal histology and lymphovascular invasion are associated with germline DNA-repair gene mutations in prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Germline mutations in genes mediating DNA repair are common in men with recurrent and advanced prostate cancer, and their presence may alter prognosis and management. We aimed to define pathological and clinical characteristics associated with germline DNA-repair gene mutations, to facilitate selection of patients for germline testing. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 150 unselected patients with recurrent or metastatic prostate cancer who were offered germline genetic testing by a single oncologist using a clinical-grade assay (Color Genomics). This platform utilizes next-generation sequencing from saliva to interrogate 30 cancer-susceptibility genes. Presence or absence of a deleterious germline mutation was correlated with histological and clinical characteristics, and with family history of cancer. All patients with DNA-sequence alterations (pathogenic or variants) were offered genetic counseling. RESULTS: Between July 2016 and July 2017, 150 consecutive patients underwent germline testing; pathogenic mutations were identified in 21 men (14%). Among those with germline mutations, 9 (43%) were in BRCA2, 3 (14%) were in ATM, 3 (14%) were in CHEK2, and 2 (9%) were in BRCA1. While there were no associations between germline mutations and age, tumor stage, Gleason sum or family history; mutation-positive patients had lower median PSA levels at diagnosis (5.5 vs 8.6 ng/mL, P = 0.01) and unique pathologic features. Namely, men with germline mutations were more likely to harbor intraductal/ductal histology (48% vs 12%, P < 0.01) and lymphovascular invasion (52% vs 14%, P < 0.01). Finally, 44% of patients with a positive germline test would not have been offered genetic screening according to current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of intraductal/ductal histology and lymphovascular invasion appear to be associated with pathogenic germline DNA-repair gene mutations in men with prostate cancer, and identification of these features may help to select patients for germline testing. NCCN guidelines may be inadequate in predicting which prostate cancer patients should undergo genetic screening.

Ability of a Genomic Classifier to Predict Metastasis and Prostate Cancer-specific Mortality after Radiation or Surgery based on Needle Biopsy Specimens.

BACKGROUND: Decipher is a validated genomic classifier developed to determine the biological potential for metastasis after radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of biopsy Decipher to predict metastasis and Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in primarily intermediate- to high-risk patients treated with RP or radiation therapy (RT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and thirty-five patients treated with either RP (n=105) or RT±androgen deprivation therapy (n=130) with available genomic expression profiles generated from diagnostic biopsy specimens from seven tertiary referral centers. The highest-grade core was sampled and Decipher was calculated based on a locked random forest model. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Metastasis and PCSM were the primary and secondary outcomes of the study, respectively. Cox analysis and c-index were used to evaluate the performance of Decipher. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: With a median follow-up of 6 yr among censored patients, 34 patients developed metastases and 11 died of prostate cancer. On multivariable analysis, biopsy Decipher remained a significant predictor of metastasis (hazard ratio: 1.37 per 10% increase in score, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.78, p=0.018) after adjusting for clinical variables. For predicting metastasis 5-yr post-biopsy, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score had a c-index of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.69), while Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment plus biopsy Decipher had a c-index of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60-0.82). National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group had a c-index of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.53-0.77), while National Comprehensive Cancer Network plus biopsy Decipher had a c-index of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.66-0.82). Biopsy Decipher was a significant predictor of PCSM (hazard ratio: 1.57 per 10% increase in score, 95% CI: 1.03-2.48, p=0.037), with a 5-yr PCSM rate of 0%, 0%, and 9.4% for Decipher low, intermediate, and high, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Biopsy Decipher predicted metastasis and PCSM from diagnostic biopsy specimens of primarily intermediate- and high-risk men treated with first-line RT or RP. PATIENT SUMMARY: Biopsy Decipher predicted metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality risk from diagnostic biopsy specimens.

Implementation of a Surgeon-Level Comparative Quality Performance Review to Improve Positive Surgical Margin Rates during Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Success in the era of value-based payment will depend on the capacity of health systems to improve quality while controlling costs. Comparative quality performance review can be used to drive improvements in surgical outcomes and thereby reduce costs. We sought to determine the efficacy of a comparative quality performance review to improve a surgeon-level measure of surgical oncologic quality, that is the positive surgical margin rate at the time of radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight surgeons who performed consecutive radical prostatectomies at a single high volume institution between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015 were included in analysis. Individual surgeons were provided with confidential report cards every 6 months detailing their case mix, case volume and pT2 radical prostatectomy positive surgical margin rate relative to 1) their own self-matched data, 2) the de-identified data of their colleagues and 3) institutional aggregate data during the study period. Positive surgical margin rates were compared before and after intervention. Hierarchal logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association of study period on the odds of positive surgical margins, adjusted for prostate specific antigen level and National Comprehensive Cancer Network® risk group. RESULTS: Overall, 1,822 (1,392 before and 430 after intervention) radical prostatectomies were performed that met study inclusion criteria. The aggregate departmental unadjusted positive surgical margin rates were 10.6% and 7.4% in the pre-intervention and post-intervention groups, respectively. After adjusting for higher risk cancer in the post-intervention group, there was a significant protective association of post-intervention status on positive margins (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43-0.97, p = 0.03). All 5 surgeons with positive surgical margin rates higher than the aggregate department rate in the pre-intervention period showed improvement after intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative quality performance review can be implemented at the surgeon level and can promote improvement in an objective measure of surgical oncology quality.