External Validation of a Digital Pathology-based Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Architecture in the NRG/RTOG 9902 Phase 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Accurate risk stratification is critical to guide management decisions in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previously, we had developed and validated a multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) model generated from digital histopathology and clinical features. Here, we externally validate this model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the MMAI model on men with high-risk or locally advanced PCa treated and followed as part of a phase 3 randomized control trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Our validation cohort included 318 localized high-risk PCa patients from NRG/RTOG 9902 with available histopathology (337 [85%] of the 397 patients enrolled into the trial had available slides, of which 19 [5.6%] failed due to poor image quality). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Two previously locked prognostic MMAI models were validated for their intended endpoint: distant metastasis (DM) and PCa-specific mortality (PCSM). Individual clinical factors and the number of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk features served as comparators. Subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was reported per standard deviation increase of the score with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using Fine-Gray or Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The DM and PCSM MMAI algorithms were significantly and independently associated with the risk of DM (sHR [95% CI] = 2.33 [1.60-3.38], p < 0.001) and PCSM, respectively (sHR [95% CI] = 3.54 [2.38-5.28], p < 0.001) when compared against other prognostic clinical factors and NCCN high-risk features. The lower 75% of patients by DM MMAI had estimated 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 4% and 7%, and the highest quartile had average 5- and 10-yr DM rates of 19% and 32%, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for the PCSM MMAI algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: We externally validated the prognostic ability of MMAI models previously developed among men with localized high-risk disease. MMAI prognostic models further risk stratify beyond the clinical and pathological variables for DM and PCSM in a population of men already at a high risk for disease progression. This study provides evidence for consistent validation of our deep learning MMAI models to improve prognostication and enable more informed decision-making for patient care. PATIENT SUMMARY: This paper presents a novel approach using images from pathology slides along with clinical variables to validate artificial intelligence (computer-generated) prognostic models. When implemented, clinicians can offer a more personalized and tailored prognostic discussion for men with localized prostate cancer.

The Impact of Positron Emission Tomography Imaging and Tumor Molecular Profiling on Risk Stratification, Treatment Choice, and Oncological Outcomes of Patients with Primary or Relapsed Prostate Cancer: An International Collaborative Review of the Existing Literature.

CONTEXT: The clinical introduction of next-generation imaging methods and molecular biomarkers ("radiogenomics") has revolutionized the field of prostate cancer (PCa). While the clinical validity of these tests has thoroughly been vetted, their clinical utility remains a matter of investigation. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence to date on the impact of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and tissue-based prognostic biomarkers, including Decipher, Prolaris, and Oncotype Dx, on the risk stratification, treatment choice, and oncological outcomes of men with newly diagnosed PCa or those with biochemical failure (BCF). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a quantitative systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases (2010-2022) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement guidelines. The validated Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 scoring system was used to assess the risk of bias. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 148 studies (130 on PET and 18 on biomarkers) were included. In the primary PCa setting, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET imaging was not useful in improving T staging, moderately useful in improving N staging, but consistently useful in improving M staging in patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) unfavorable intermediate- to very-high-risk PCa. Its use led to a management change in 20-30% of patients. However, the effect of these treatment changes on survival outcomes was not clear. Similarly, biomarkers in the pretherapy primary PCa setting increased and decreased the risk, respectively, in 7-30% and 32-36% of NCCN low-risk and 31-65% and 4-15% of NCCN favorable intermediate-risk patients being considered for active surveillance. A change in management was noted in up to 65% of patients, with the change being in line with the molecular risk-based reclassification, but again, the impact of these changes on survival outcomes remained unclear. Notably, in the postsurgical primary PCa setting, biomarker-guided adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) was associated with improved oncological control: Δ↓ 2-yr BCF by 22% (level 2b). In the BCF setting, the data were more mature. PSMA PET was consistently useful in improving disease localization-Δ↑ detection for T, N, and M staging was 13-32%, 19-58%, and 9-29%, respectively. Between 29% and 73% of patients had a change in management. Most importantly, these management changes were associated with improved survival outcomes in three trials: Δ↑ 4-yr disease-free survival by 24.3%, Δ↑ 6-mo metastasis-free survival (MFS) by 46.7%, and Δ↑ androgen deprivation therapy-free survival by 8 mo in patients who received PET-concordant RT (level 1b-2b). Biomarker testing in these patients also appeared to be helpful in risk stratifying and guiding the use of early salvage RT (sRT) and concomitant hormonal therapy. Patients with high-genomic-risk scores benefitted from treatment intensification: Δ↑ 8-yr MFS by 20% with the use of early sRT and Δ↑ 12-yr MFS by 11.2% with the use of hormonal therapy alongside early sRT, while low-genomic-risk score patients did equally well with initial conservative management (level 3). CONCLUSIONS: Both PSMA PET imaging and tumor molecular profiling provide actionable information in the management of men with primary PCa and those with BCF. Emerging data suggest that radiogenomics-guided treatments translate into direct survival benefits for patients, however, additional prospective data are awaited. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we evaluated the utility of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and tumor molecular profiling in guiding the care of men with prostate cancer (PCa). We found that these tests augmented risk stratification, altered management, and improved cancer control in men with a new diagnosis of PCa or for those experiencing a relapse.

Mindfulness-based stress reduction for men on active surveillance for prostate cancer and their spouses: Design and methodology of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although active surveillance (AS) is an increasingly adopted treatment paradigm for management of very low risk prostate cancer, many men and their partners face a variety of AS-related psychosocial stressors. Stressors may include anxiety and fear of progression, which may negatively affect short- and long-term psychosocial adjustment and influence early withdrawal from AS in order to seek definitive therapies such as surgery or radiation. Here we describe the protocol for an NCI-funded trial, which seeks to examine the efficacy of mindfulness training compared with a time/attention-matched health promotion control condition in a geographically generalizable sample of men on AS and their spouses. METHODS: Using a randomized, controlled, partially double-blinded study design, this study involves the delivery of 8 weeks of standardized mindfulness training (MBSR; mindfulness-based stress reduction) and patient reported outcomes over a 12-month period (proposed enrollment of 80 men on AS and spouses), compared with a health promotion control (proposed enrollment of 80 men on AS and spouses) that has been matched for time and attention. Baseline (T1) measures (e.g., anxiety, fear of progression, quality of life) are administered just prior to randomization to the two study arms, followed by repeated assessments at 2 months (T2), 6 months (T3) and 12 months (T4). CONCLUSION: This study has the potential to offer men and their partners on AS with important educational and self-regulatory skills to better cope and adjust with known stressors related to being placed on this protocol.

Satisfaction With Clinician-Led Germline Genetic Counseling in Patients With Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Indications for germline testing in prostate cancer patients have expanded substantially over the past decade. With a near-universal shortage of genetic counselors and increasing demand, increased access to genetic counseling is crucial. We sought to prospectively implement and assess a clinician-led approach to genetic counseling and testing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic or localized prostate cancer meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network® criteria for consideration of genetic testing were offered pre-test genetic counseling by their urologist or medical oncologist as part of their routine clinical care and concurrently approached for enrollment in the Germline Genetics in Prostate Cancer Study. Consented patients filled out a post-counseling survey using validated instruments to assess the quality of counseling. For patients who elected to undergo genetic testing, an additional validated questionnaire was completed following disclosure of results. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients undergoing testing, with a target >60% of patients. The secondary outcome was overall satisfaction with counseling, with a target >85% of patients. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients enrolled, and 203 patients elected to undergo genetic testing. Post-counseling surveys were obtained from 265 patients, and post-genetic testing surveys were obtained from 132 patients. Patient satisfaction was high, with 98% of patients reporting being satisfied with the overall quality of pre-test counseling, and 74% of patients elected to undergo genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the effectiveness of clinician-led genetic counseling in prostate cancer. With clinician training, this approach can be utilized to expand access to appropriate germline genetic testing.

Genetic testing in prostate cancer management: Considerations informing primary care.

Inherited genetic mutations can significantly increase the risk for prostate cancer (PC), may be associated with aggressive disease and poorer outcomes, and can have hereditary cancer implications for men and their families. Germline genetic testing (hereditary cancer genetic testing) is now strongly recommended for patients with advanced/metastatic PC, particularly given the impact on targeted therapy selection or clinical trial options, with expanded National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and endorsement from multiple professional societies. Furthermore, National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend genetic testing for men with PC across the stage and risk spectrum and for unaffected men at high risk for PC based on family history to identify hereditary cancer risk. Primary care is a critical field in which providers evaluate men at an elevated risk for PC, men living with PC, and PC survivors for whom germline testing may be indicated. Therefore, there is a critical need to engage and educate primary care providers regarding the role of genetic testing and the impact of results on PC screening, treatment, and cascade testing for family members of affected men. This review highlights key aspects of genetic testing in PC, the role of clinicians, with a focus on primary care, the importance of obtaining a comprehensive family history, current germline testing guidelines, and the impact on precision PC care. With emerging evidence and guidelines, clinical pathways are needed to facilitate integrated genetic education, testing, and counseling services in appropriately selected patients. There is also a need for providers to understand the field of genetic counseling and how best to collaborate to enhance multidisciplinary patient care.

Delayed Urological Cancer Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Urologists' Experience.

INTRODUCTION: The arrival of coronavirus disrupted health care systems and forced delays in cancer treatment. We explored the experience of urologists who had to delay their patients' cancer care. METHODS: Urologists who treat prostate, bladder, and renal cancers, selected through purposive sampling, responded to a survey about cancer treatment delay. They were asked about their practice setting, decision making and interactions with patients, and they were asked to reflect on their personal experience. A 0 to 10 point scale, modeled on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network' Distress Thermometer (NCCN-DT), validated for cancer patients with cancer, was used to estimate physician distress. We used descriptive statistics to analyze survey results. RESULTS: Of the 64 participating urologists, 98% delayed surgical treatment; fewer delayed cases of advanced cancers (42% for ≥T3/T4 or Gleason ≥8 prostate cancers, 58% for muscle invasive bladder cancer, 61% for ≥T2 renal cancers). They reported feeling anxious (44%) and helpless (29%), and their median distress score was 5 (range 0-10). They relied on their own risk assessments (67%) and consulted colleagues (56%) and national guidelines (53%) when making treatment deferral decisions. They identified a number of concerns as they resumed surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a comparison to the NCCN-DT clinical cutoff distress level of 4, urologists experienced moderately high levels of distress as they delayed cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic and expressed concerns going forward. While the focus on patient care is paramount in a pandemic, it is important to recognize physician distress and develop practical and psychological strategies for distress mitigation.

Development and Validation of a Clinical Prognostic Stage Group System for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Using Disease-Specific Mortality Results From the International Staging Collaboration for Cancer of the Prostate.

Importance: In 2016, the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) established criteria to evaluate prediction models for staging. No localized prostate cancer models were endorsed by the Precision Medicine Core committee, and 8th edition staging was based on expert consensus. Objective: To develop and validate a pretreatment clinical prognostic stage group system for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multinational cohort study included 7 centers from the United States, Canada, and Europe, the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Veterans Affairs Medical Centers collaborative (5 centers), and the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry (43 centers) (the STAR-CAP cohort). Patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 prostate adenocarcinoma treated from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2013 (follow-up completed December 31, 2017). The STAR-CAP cohort was randomly divided into training and validation data sets; statisticians were blinded to the validation data until the model was locked. A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cohort was used as a second validation set. Analysis was performed from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019. Exposures: Curative intent radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Based on a competing-risk regression model, a points-based Score staging system was developed. Model discrimination (C index), calibration, and overall performance were assessed in the validation cohorts. Results: Of 19 684 patients included in the analysis (median age, 64.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 59.0-70.0] years), 12 421 were treated with RP and 7263 with radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 71.8 (IQR, 34.3-124.3) months; 4078 (20.7%) were followed up for at least 10 years. Age, T category, N category, Gleason grade, pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level, and the percentage of positive core biopsy results among biopsies performed were included as variables. In the validation set, predicted 10-year PCSM for the 9 Score groups ranged from 0.3% to 40.0%. The 10-year C index (0.796; 95% CI, 0.760-0.828) exceeded that of the AJCC 8th edition (0.757; 95% CI, 0.719-0.792), which was improved across age, race, and treatment modality and within the SEER validation cohort. The Score system performed similarly to individualized random survival forest and interaction models and outperformed National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) risk grouping 3- and 4-tier classification systems (10-year C index for NCCN 3-tier, 0.729; for NCCN 4-tier, 0.746; for Score, 0.794) as well as CAPRA (10-year C index for CAPRA, 0.760; for Score, 0.782). Conclusions and Relevance: Using a large, diverse international cohort treated with standard curative treatment options, a proposed AJCC-compliant clinical prognostic stage group system for prostate cancer has been developed. This system may allow consistency of reporting and interpretation of results and clinical trial design.

Performance of clinicopathologic models in men with high risk localized prostate cancer: impact of a 22-gene genomic classifier.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer exhibits biological and clinical heterogeneity even within established clinico-pathologic risk groups. The Decipher genomic classifier (GC) is a validated method to further risk-stratify disease in patients with prostate cancer, but its performance solely within National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk disease has not been undertaken to date. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective study of 405 men with high-risk prostate cancer who underwent primary treatment with radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) at 11 centers from 1995 to 2005 was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the hazard ratios (HR) for the development of metastatic disease based on clinico-pathologic variables, risk groups, and GC score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was determined for regression models without and with the GC score. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 82 months, 104 patients (26%) developed metastatic disease. On univariable analysis, increasing GC score was significantly associated with metastatic disease ([HR]: 1.34 per 0.1 unit increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-1.50, p < 0.001), while age, serum PSA, biopsy GG, and clinical T-stage were not (all p > 0.05). On multivariable analysis, GC score (HR: 1.33 per 0.1 unit increase, 95% CI: 1.19-1.48, p < 0.001) and GC high-risk (vs low-risk, HR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.79-4.87, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with metastasis. The addition of GC score to regression models based on NCCN risk group improved model AUC from 0.46 to 0.67, and CAPRA from 0.59 to 0.71. CONCLUSIONS: Among men with high-risk prostate cancer, conventional clinico-pathologic data had poor discrimination to risk stratify development of metastatic disease. GC score was a significant and independent predictor of metastasis and may help identify men best suited for treatment intensification/de-escalation.

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.

Bringing Prostate Cancer Germline Genetics into Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: Until recently the role of germline genetics in prostate cancer care was not well defined. While important questions remain, we reviewed the current understanding of germline genetic alterations related to prostate cancer. We discuss the clinical implications for genetic counseling, genetic testing, early detection and treatment in men with these mutations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed® for English language articles published since 2001 with the key words "germline mutations," "BRCA," "family history" or "prostate cancer genetics." We also used relevant data from websites, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, National Comprehensive Cancer Network®, Bureau of Labor Statistics and National Society of Genetic Counselors websites. RESULTS: A number of germline mutations in DNA damage repair genes ( BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, ATM and PALB2) and in DNA mismatch repair genes ( MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2) can drive the development of prostate cancer. Careful genetic counseling coupled with multipanel gene testing can help identify men with these mutations and provide enhanced understanding of the disease risk. Cascade testing of family members can then have an impact extending well beyond the index patient. In men with a pathogenic germline mutation the optimal early detection paradigm is not well defined. Data from the IMPACT study ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00261456) that the cancer detection rate is substantially elevated in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers at prostate specific antigen greater than 3 ng/ml has helped establish the importance of close prostate specific antigen screening in these men. Additionally, BRCA2 and likely other DNA damage repair mutations are associated with aggressive disease, although it is not yet clear how this impacts localized disease management. However, there is strong evidence that patients with metastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer who have DNA damage repair defects respond positively to targeting PARP enzymes. In many cancers there is also evidence that patients with an increased tumor mutational burden, such as in Lynch syndrome, are particularly sensitive to immune checkpoint inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Emerging evidence supports the implementation of germline genetic counseling and testing as a key component of prostate cancer management. Further research is needed to elucidate the clinical significance of lesser known germline mutations and develop optimal screening, early detection and treatment paradigms in this patient population.

Circulating Tumor Cells as a Predictor of Treatment Response in Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Using nonenrichment-based, potentially more sensitive Epic Sciences circulating tumor cell (CTC) platform, we sought to detect and characterize CTCs in untreated, high-risk localized prostate cancer and to evaluate their clinical implication. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2015, blood samples were prospectively collected from patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk localized prostate cancer undergoing either radiotherapy (XRT) plus androgen deprivation therapy or radical prostatectomy (RP) with curative intent. Samples were analyzed with the Epic Sciences platform with 4J,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole, CD45, cytokeratin (CK), and androgen receptor (AR) N-terminal staining. CTC counts were correlated with biochemical recurrence (BCR). RESULTS: A diversity of CTC subtypes, including CK-positive, CK-negative, AR-positive, and CTC clusters, were observed in 73.3% (33 of 45) of patients with evaluable data. The median follow-up was 14.2 months (range, 0.5 to 43.7 months). BCR occurred more frequently in the RP group than XRT (15 of 26 v one of 19), with most patients in the XRT group continuing to receive androgen deprivation therapy. A higher proportion of metastatic events were observed in the RP group (five of 26 v one of 19). In the RP group, BCR and development of metastases were associated with a higher total number of CTCs, AR-positive CTCs, and CTC phenotypic heterogeneity. One patient who developed BCR and metastases quickly after RP had diverse phenotypical CTC subtypes, and single-cell genomic analyses of all detectable CTCs confirmed common prostate cancer copy number alterations and PTEN loss. CONCLUSION: CTCs can be identified in most patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer before definitive therapy using the Epic Sciences platform. If confirmed in a larger cohort with longer follow-up, phenotypic and genomic characterization of CTCs pretherapy may provide an additional means of risk stratifying patients with newly diagnosed high-risk disease and potentially help identify patients who could require multimodal therapy.

Pathological upgrading at radical prostatectomy for patients with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer: implications of confirmatory testing for patients considering active surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk, number of positive biopsy cores, age, and early confirmatory test results on pathological upgrading at radical prostatectomy (RP), in order to better understand whether early confirmatory testing and better risk stratification are necessary for all men with Grade Group (GG) 1 cancers who are considering active surveillance (AS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified men in Michigan initially diagnosed with GG1 prostate cancer, from January 2012 to November 2017, who had a RP within 1 year of diagnosis. Our endpoints were: (i) ≥GG2 cancer at RP and (ii) adverse pathology (≥GG3 and/or ≥pT3a). We compared upgrading according to NCCN risk, number of positive biopsy cores, and age. Last, we examined if confirmatory test results were associated with upgrading or adverse pathology at RP. RESULTS: Amongst 1966 patients with GG1 cancer at diagnosis, the rates of upgrading to ≥GG2 and adverse pathology were 40% and 59% (P < 0.001), and 10% and 17% (P = 0.003) for patients with very-low- and low-risk cancers, respectively. Upgrading by volume ranged from 49% to 67% for ≥GG2, and 16% to 23% for adverse pathology. Generally, more patients aged ≥70 vs <70 years had adverse pathology. Unreassuring confirmatory test results had a higher likelihood of adverse pathology than reassuring tests (35% vs 18%, P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Upgrading and adverse pathology are common amongst patients initially diagnosed with GG1 prostate cancer. Early use of confirmatory testing may facilitate the identification of patients with more aggressive disease ensuring improved risk classification and safer selection of patients for AS.

Transcriptomic heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Commercial gene expression assays are guiding clinical decision making in patients with prostate cancer, particularly when considering active surveillance. Given heterogeneity and multifocality of primary prostate cancer, such assays should ideally be robust to the coexistence of unsampled higher grade disease elsewhere in the prostate in order to have clinical utility. Herein, we comprehensively evaluated transcriptomic profiles of primary multifocal prostate cancer to assess robustness to clinically relevant multifocality. METHODS: We designed a comprehensive, multiplexed targeted RNA-sequencing assay capable of assessing multiple transcriptional classes and deriving commercially available prognostic signatures, including the Myriad Prolaris Cell Cycle Progression score, the Oncotype DX Genomic Prostate Score, and the GenomeDX Decipher Genomic Classifier. We applied this assay to a retrospective, multi-institutional cohort of 156 prostate cancer samples. Derived commercial biomarker scores for 120 informative primary prostate cancer samples from 44 cases were determined and compared. RESULTS: Derived expression scores were positively correlated with tumor grade (rS = 0.53-0.73; all P < 0.001), both within the same case and across the entire cohort. In cases of extreme grade-discordant multifocality (co-occurrence of grade group 1 [GG1] and ≥GG4 foci], gene expression scores were significantly lower in low- (GG1) versus high-grade (≥GG4) foci (all P < 0.001). No significant differences in expression scores, however, were observed between GG1 foci from prostates with and without coexisting higher grade cancer (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Multifocal, low-grade and high-grade prostate cancer foci exhibit distinct prognostic expression signatures. These findings demonstrate that prognostic RNA expression assays performed on low-grade prostate cancer biopsy tissue may not provide meaningful information on the presence of coexisting unsampled aggressive disease. FUNDING: Prostate Cancer Foundation, National Institutes of Health (U01 CA214170, R01 CA183857, University of Michigan Prostate Specialized Program of Research Excellence [S.P.O.R.E.] P50 CA186786-05, Weill Cornell Medicine S.P.O.R.E. P50 CA211024-01A1), Men of Michigan Prostate Cancer Research Fund, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center core grant (2-P30-CA-046592-24), A. Alfred Taubman Biomedical Research Institute, and Department of Defense.

Standardizing the definition of adverse pathology for lower risk men undergoing radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Numerous definitions of adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy (RP) have been proposed and implemented for both research and clinical care, and there is tremendous variation in the specific criteria used to define adverse pathology in these settings. Given the current landscape in which magnetic resonance imaging criteria and biomarker cutoffs are validated for disparate adverse pathology definitions, we sought to identify which of these is most closely tied to biochemical recurrence (BCR) after RP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 2,837 patients who underwent RP at a single institution for localized prostate cancer (PCa) were included. We evaluated the following existing definitions of adverse pathology at RP: (1) Gleason score ≥7, (2) primary Gleason pattern ≥4, (3) Gleason score ≥7 or pathologic stage T3-4, (4) pathologic stage T3-4, (5) primary Gleason pattern ≥4 or pathologic stage T3-4. The primary outcome measure was BCR. Multiple statistical techniques were used to assess BCR prediction. RESULTS: Of the 5 definitions assessed, 1 (primary Gleason pattern ≥4 or pathologic stage T3-4, 540 patients [19% of cohort]) consistently outperformed the other definitions across all statistical measures. Additionally, a total of only 13 (6.6%) and 34 (10.3%) men with very-low-risk and low-risk cancer per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline, respectively, met this definition of adverse pathology at the time of RP. CONCLUSIONS: Varying definitions of adverse pathology differ in their prognostic performance. The criteria defined by either primary Gleason pattern ≥4 or pT3-4 disease appears to most accurately predict BCR in this subset of patients with lower risk PCa at the time of diagnosis. Additionally, men with very-low-risk or low-risk PCa per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines are relatively unlikely to have adverse pathology at the time of surgical resection. These data may help inform the use of imaging and molecular markers as well as the intensity of surveillance in men with newly diagnosed PCa.

Novel Approaches to the Management of Sleep-Disordered Breathing.

In the last several years, a variety of novel approaches to the treatment of sleep-disordered breathing have emerged. This new technology holds promise in serving to re-engage with patients who have previously been lost to follow-up due to continuous positive airway pressure intolerance. With more tools at our disposal, in turn more options can be offered to patients' growing demand for alternatives that are tailored to their individual needs. The key to proper deployment of alternative therapies will often depend on identification of certain phenotypic traits that trend toward a reasonable response to a given therapy.

Short-term calorie and protein restriction provide partial protection from chemotoxicity but do not delay glioma progression.

Short-term starvation (STS) protects normal cells while simultaneously sensitizing malignant cells to high-dose chemotherapeutic drugs in mice and possibly patients. The fasting-dependent protection of normal cells and sensitization of malignant cells depends, in part, on reduced levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) and glucose. Calorie restricted diets with defined macronutrient (carbohydrate, protein, fat) ratios were evaluated for the effects on stress sensitization markers and protection in mice treated with high-dose chemotherapy. We show that short-term CR significantly reduced both glucose and IGF-1 levels, but when specific macronutrient deficiencies were tested, only the complete lack of proteins reduced IGF-1 levels. Short-term 50% CR combined with either severe protein-deficiency or ketogenic diets improved chemotoxicity resistance similarly to the standard 50% CR, but did not result in the high protection caused by STS. Notably, a high protein diet reversed the beneficial effects of short-term CR. In a subcutaneous mouse model of glioma, feeding a low protein (4% calories from protein) diet for more than 20days did not delay tumor progression once the tumor became palpable. Also, cycles of short-term (3days) 50% CR did not augment the chemotherapy efficacy of cisplatin in a murine breast cancer model. These results indicate that the protection from chemotoxicity and retardation of the progression of certain tumors achieved with fasting is not obtained with short-term calorie and/or macronutrient restriction.

Hairpin-bisulfite PCR: assessing epigenetic methylation patterns on complementary strands of individual DNA molecules.

Epigenetic inheritance, the transmission of gene expression states from parent to daughter cells, often involves methylation of DNA. In eukaryotes, cytosine methylation is a frequent component of epigenetic mechanisms. Failure to transmit faithfully a methylated or an unmethylated state of cytosine can lead to altered phenotypes in plants and animals. A central unresolved question in epigenetics concerns the mechanisms by which a locus maintains, or changes, its state of cytosine methylation. We developed "hairpin-bisulfite PCR" to analyze these mechanisms. This method reveals the extent of methylation symmetry between the complementary strands of individual DNA molecules. Using hairpin-bisulfite PCR, we determined the fidelity of methylation transmission in the CpG island of the FMR1 gene in human lymphocytes. For the hypermethylated CpG island of this gene, characteristic of inactive-X alleles, we estimate a maintenance methylation efficiency of approximately 0.96 per site per cell division. For de novo methylation efficiency (E(d)), remarkably different estimates were obtained for the hypermethylated CpG island (E(d) = 0.17), compared with the hypomethylated island on the active-X chromosome (E(d) < 0.01). These results clarify the mechanisms by which the alternative hypomethylated and hypermethylated states of CpG islands are stably maintained through many cell divisions. We also analyzed a region of human L1 transposable elements. These L1 data provide accurate methylation patterns for the complementary strand of each repeat sequence analyzed. Hairpin-bisulfite PCR will be a powerful tool in studying other processes for which genetic or epigenetic information differs on the two complementary strands of DNA.