Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Using Protocol-Directed Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Outcomes from protocol-directed active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate cancers are needed to support decision-making. Objective: To characterize the long-term oncological outcomes of patients receiving active surveillance in a multicenter, protocol-directed cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study (PASS) is a prospective cohort study initiated in 2008. A cohort of 2155 men with favorable-risk prostate cancer and no prior treatment were enrolled at 10 North American centers through August 2022. Exposure: Active surveillance for prostate cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cumulative incidence of biopsy grade reclassification, treatment, metastasis, prostate cancer mortality, overall mortality, and recurrence after treatment in patients treated after the first or subsequent surveillance biopsies. Results: Among 2155 patients with localized prostate cancer, the median follow-up was 7.2 years, median age was 63 years, 83% were White, 7% were Black, 90% were diagnosed with grade group 1 cancer, and median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 5.2 ng/mL. Ten years after diagnosis, the incidence of biopsy grade reclassification and treatment were 43% (95% CI, 40%-45%) and 49% (95% CI, 47%-52%), respectively. There were 425 and 396 patients treated after confirmatory or subsequent surveillance biopsies (median of 1.5 and 4.6 years after diagnosis, respectively) and the 5-year rates of recurrence were 11% (95% CI, 7%-15%) and 8% (95% CI, 5%-11%), respectively. Progression to metastatic cancer occurred in 21 participants and there were 3 prostate cancer-related deaths. The estimated rates of metastasis or prostate cancer-specific mortality at 10 years after diagnosis were 1.4% (95% CI, 0.7%-2%) and 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.4%), respectively; overall mortality in the same time period was 5.1% (95% CI, 3.8%-6.4%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, 10 years after diagnosis, 49% of men remained free of progression or treatment, less than 2% developed metastatic disease, and less than 1% died of their disease. Later progression and treatment during surveillance were not associated with worse outcomes. These results demonstrate active surveillance as an effective management strategy for patients diagnosed with favorable-risk prostate cancer.

Dietary Patterns and Risk of Gleason Grade Progression among Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Results from the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study.

Modifiable lifestyle factors, such as following a healthy dietary pattern may delay or prevent prostate cancer (PCa) progression. However, few studies have evaluated whether following specific dietary patterns after PCa diagnosis impacts risk of disease progression among men with localized PCa managed by active surveillance (AS). 564 men enrolled in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study, a protocol-driven AS study utilizing a pre-specified prostate-specific antigen monitoring and surveillance biopsy regimen, completed a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) at enrollment and had ≥ 1 surveillance biopsy during follow-up. FFQs were used to evaluate adherence to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (Healthy Eating index (HEI))-2015, alternative Mediterranean Diet (aMED), and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) dietary patterns. Multivariable-adjusted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. During a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 237 men experienced an increase in Gleason score on subsequent biopsy (grade reclassification). Higher HEI-2015, aMED or DASH diet scores after diagnosis were not associated with significant reductions in the risk of grade reclassification during AS. However, these dietary patterns have well-established protective effects on chronic diseases and mortality and remain a prudent choice for men with prostate cancer managed by AS.

Impact of Prostate Health Index Results for Prediction of Biopsy Grade Reclassification During Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: We assessed whether Prostate Health Index results improve prediction of grade reclassification for men on active surveillance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We identified men in Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study with Grade Group 1 cancer. Outcome was grade reclassification to Grade Group 2+ cancer. We considered decision rules to maximize specificity with sensitivity set at 95%. We derived rules based on clinical data (R1) vs clinical data+Prostate Health Index (R3). We considered an "or"-logic rule combining clinical score and Prostate Health Index (R4), and a "2-step" rule using clinical data followed by risk stratification based on Prostate Health Index (R2). Rules were applied to a validation set, where values of R2-R4 vs R1 for specificity and sensitivity were evaluated. RESULTS: We included 1,532 biopsies (n = 610 discovery; n = 922 validation) among 1,142 men. Grade reclassification was seen in 27% of biopsies (23% discovery, 29% validation). Among the discovery set, at 95% sensitivity, R2 yielded highest specificity at 27% vs 17% for R1. In the validation set, R3 had best performance vs R1 with Δsensitivity = -4% and Δspecificity = +6%. There was slight improvement for R3 vs R1 for confirmatory biopsy (AUC 0.745 vs R1 0.724, ΔAUC 0.021, 95% CI 0.002-0.041) but not for subsequent biopsies (ΔAUC -0.012, 95% CI -0.031-0.006). R3 did not have better discrimination vs R1 among the biopsy cohort overall (ΔAUC 0.007, 95% CI -0.007-0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Among active surveillance patients, using Prostate Health Index with clinical data modestly improved prediction of grade reclassification on confirmatory biopsy and did not improve prediction on subsequent biopsies.

Germline mutations in penetrant cancer predisposition genes are rare in men with prostate cancer selecting active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Pathogenic germline mutations in several rare penetrant cancer predisposition genes are associated with an increased risk of aggressive prostate cancer (PC). Our objectives were to determine the prevalence of pathogenic germline mutations in men with low-risk PC on active surveillance, and assess whether pathogenic germline mutations associate with grade reclassification or adverse pathology, recurrence, or metastases, in men treated after initial surveillance. METHODS: Men prospectively enrolled in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study (PASS) were retrospectively sampled for the study. Germline DNA was sequenced utilizing a hereditary cancer gene panel. Mutations were classified according to the American College of Clinical Genetics and Genomics' guidelines. The association of pathogenic germline mutations with grade reclassification and adverse characteristics was evaluated by weighted Cox proportional hazards modeling and conditional logistic regression, respectively. RESULTS: Overall, 29 of 437 (6.6%) study participants harbored a pathogenic germline mutation of which 19 occurred in a gene involved in DNA repair (4.3%). Eight participants (1.8%) had pathogenic germline mutations in three genes associated with aggressive PC: ATM, BRCA1, and BRCA2. The presence of pathogenic germline mutations in DNA repair genes did not associate with adverse characteristics (univariate analysis HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.36-2.06, p = 0.7). The carrier rates of pathogenic germline mutations in ATM, BRCA1, and BRCA2did not differ in men with or without grade reclassification (1.9% vs. 1.8%). CONCLUSION: The frequency of pathogenic germline mutations in penetrant cancer predisposition genes is extremely low in men with PC undergoing active surveillance and pathogenic germline mutations had no apparent association with grade reclassification or adverse characteristics.

Treatment in the absence of disease reclassification among men on active surveillance for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining men on active surveillance for prostate cancer can be challenging. Although most men who eventually undergo treatment have experienced clinical progression, a smaller subset elects treatment in the absence of disease reclassification. This study sought to understand factors associated with treatment in a large, contemporary, prospective cohort. METHODS: This study identified 1789 men in the Canary Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Study cohort enrolled as of 2020 with a median follow-up of 5.6 years. Clinical and demographic data as well as information on patient-reported quality of life and urinary symptoms were used in multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models to identify factors associated with the time to treatment RESULTS: Within 4 years of their diagnosis, 33% of men (95% confidence interval [CI], 30%-35%) underwent treatment, and 10% (95% CI, 9%-12%) were treated in the absence of reclassification. The most significant factor associated with any treatment was an increasing Gleason grade group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 14.5; 95% CI, 11.7-17.9). Urinary quality-of-life scores were associated with treatment without reclassification (aHR comparing "mostly dissatisfied/terrible" with "pleased/mixed," 2.65; 95% CI, 1.54-4.59). In a subset analysis (n = 692), married men, compared with single men, were more likely to undergo treatment in the absence of reclassification (aHR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.04-6.66). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of men with prostate cancer undergo treatment in the absence of clinical changes in their cancers, and quality-of-life changes and marital status may be important factors in these decisions. LAY SUMMARY: This analysis of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer shows that approximately 1 in 10 men will decide to be treated within 4 years of their diagnosis even if their cancer is stable. These choices may be related in part to quality-or-life or spousal concerns.

Targeting backdoor androgen synthesis through AKR1C3 inhibition: A presurgical hormonal ablative neoadjuvant trial in high-risk localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Localized prostate cancers (PCs) may resist neoadjuvant androgen receptor (AR)-targeted therapies as a result of persistent intraprostatic androgens arising through upregulation of steroidogenic enzymes. Therefore, we sought to evaluate clinical effects of neoadjuvant indomethacin (Indo), which inhibits the steroidogenic enzyme AKR1C3, in addition to combinatorial anti-androgen blockade, in men with high-risk PC undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: This was an open label, single-site, Phase II neoadjuvant trial in men with high to very-high-risk PC, as defined by NCCN criteria. Patients received 12 weeks of apalutamide (Apa), abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP), degarelix, and Indo followed by RP. Primary objective was to determine the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary objectives included minimal residual disease (MRD) rate, defined as residual cancer burden (RCB) ≤ 0.25cm3 (tumor volume multiplied by tumor cellularity) and elucidation of molecular features of resistance. RESULTS: Twenty patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Baseline median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 10.1 ng/ml, 4 (20%) patients had Gleason grade group (GG) 4 disease and 16 had GG 5 disease. At RP, 1 (5%) patient had pCR and 6 (30%) had MRD. Therapy was well tolerated. Over a median follow-up of 23.8 months, 1 of 7 (14%) men with pathologic response and 6 of 13 (46%) men without pathologic response had a PSA relapse. There was no association between prostate hormone levels or HSD3B1 genotype with pathologic response. CONCLUSIONS: In men with high-risk PC, pCR rates remained low even with combinatorial AR-directed therapy, although rates of MRD were higher. Ongoing follow-up is needed to validate clinical outcomes of men who achieve MRD.

Effect of Diagnostic Biopsy Practice Location on Grade/Volume Reclassification in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Multicenter Analysis from the Canary PASS Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: We analyzed the Canary Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (PASS) cohort to determine if patients who had diagnostic biopsy at an off-site practice were at higher risk of reclassification than those having their diagnostic biopsy at a PASS site. METHODS: Participants were prospectively enrolled at 10 academic institutions. We included patients with Gleason score 6 at diagnostic biopsy, <34% positive cores and a first surveillance biopsy in a PASS site <2 years after diagnosis. We dichotomized our population based on diagnostic biopsy location (on-PASS site vs off-PASS site) and used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate association with reclassification at first surveillance biopsy after controlling for possible confounders. We used Fisher's exact test to compare rates of definitive prostate cancer treatment by diagnostic biopsy location. RESULTS: Out of 1,648 participants in PASS, 906 met the eligibility criteria and were analyzed. Of 519 men who had off-site diagnostic biopsy, 102 (20%) had grade/volume reclassification compared to 72 (19%) of 399 patients who had on-site diagnostic biopsy. After controlling for potential confounders, location of diagnostic biopsy was not significantly associated with grade/volume reclassification (OR 1.32, IQR 0.91-1.92; p=0.141). Participants with an off-site diagnostic biopsy were more likely to elect definitive treatment than participants with an on-site diagnostic biopsy (17%, IQR 14-20 vs 14%, IQR 10-17 within 1 year after first surveillance biopsy; p <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this evaluation of a large multicenter active surveillance cohort, diagnostic biopsy location was not associated with significant differences in grade/volume reclassification on confirmatory biopsy at academic institutions.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of High Grade Cancer in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study.

PURPOSE: We investigated the ability of prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater cancer in a standardized, multi-institutional active surveillance cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated men enrolled in Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study with Gleason Grade Group less than 2 and who underwent biopsy within 12 months of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Our primary outcome was biopsy reclassification to Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater. We evaluated the performance of magnetic resonance imaging PI-RADS® score and clinical factors. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit with magnetic resonance imaging and clinical factors and used to perform receiver operating curve analyses. RESULTS: There were 361 participants with 395 prostate magnetic resonance imaging studies with a median followup of 4.1 (IQR 2.0-7.6) years. Overall 108 (27%) biopsies showed reclassification. Defining positive magnetic resonance imaging as PI-RADS 3-5, the negative predictive value and positive predictive value for detecting Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater cancer was 83% (95% CI 76-90) and 31% (95% CI 26-37), respectively. PI-RADS was significantly associated with reclassification (PI-RADS 5 vs 1 and 2 OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.21-6.17, p=0.016) in a multivariable model but did not improve upon a model with only clinical factors (AUC 0.768 vs 0.762). In 194 fusion biopsies higher grade cancer was found in targeted cores in 21 (11%) instances, while 25 (13%) had higher grade cancer in the systematic cores. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds the largest cohort data to the body of literature for magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance, recommending systematic biopsy in patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging and the inclusion of systematic biopsy in patients with positive magnetic resonance imaging.

Rectal Hydrogel Spacer Improves Late Gastrointestinal Toxicity Compared to Rectal Balloon Immobilization After Proton Beam Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to compare dosimetric parameters and late gastrointestinal outcomes between patients treated with proton beam therapy (PBT) for localized prostate cancer with rectal balloon immobilization versus a hydrogel rectal spacer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with localized, clinical stage T1-4 prostate adenocarcinoma were treated at a single institution using conventionally fractionated, dose-escalated PBT from 2013 to 2018. Patient-reported gastrointestinal toxicity was prospectively collected, and the incidence of rectal bleeding was retrospectively reviewed from patient records. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two patients were treated with rectal balloon immobilization, and 75 were treated with a rectal spacer. Rectal hydrogel spacer significantly improved rectal dosimetry while maintaining excellent target coverage. The 2-year actuarial rate of grade 2+ late rectal bleeding was 19% and 3% in the rectal balloon and hydrogel spacer groups, respectively (P = .003). In univariable analysis, the probability of grade 2+ rectal bleeding was significantly correlated with increasing rectal dose. In multivariable analysis, only receipt of spacer hydrogel (hazard ratio, 0.145; P = .010) and anticoagulation use (hazard ratio, 5.019; P < .001) were significantly associated with grade 2+ bleeding. At 2-year follow-up, patient-reported Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite bowel quality of life composite scores were less diminished in the hydrogel spacer group (absolute mean difference, 5.5; P = .030). CONCLUSIONS: Use of rectal hydrogel spacer for prostate PBT is associated with a significantly lower incidence of clinically relevant, late rectal bleeding and lower decrement in long-term, patient-reported bowel quality of life compared with rectal balloon immobilization. Our results suggest that hydrogel spacer may improve rectal sparing compared with rectal balloon immobilization during PBT for prostate cancer.

The development and comparative effectiveness of a patient-centered prostate biopsy report: a prospective, randomized study.

PURPOSE: The prostate biopsy pathology report represents a critical document used for decision-making in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, yet the content exceeds the health literacy of most patients. We sought to create and compare the effectiveness of a patient-centered prostate biopsy report compared with standard reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a modified Delphi approach, prostate cancer experts identified critical components of a prostate biopsy report. Patient focus groups provided input for syntax and formatting of patient-centered pathology reports. Ninety-four patients with recent prostate biopsies were block randomized to the standard report with or without the patient-centered report. We evaluated patient activation, self-efficacy, provider communication skills, and prostate cancer knowledge. RESULTS: Experts selected primary and secondary Gleason score and the number of positive scores as the most important elements of the report. Patients prioritized a narrative design, non-threatening language and information on risk classification. Initial assessments were completed by 87% (40/46) in the standard report group and 81% (39/48) in the patient-centered report group. There were no differences in patient activation, self-efficacy, or provider communication skills between groups. Patients who received the patient-centered report had significantly improved ability to recall their Gleason score (100% vs. 85%, p = 0.026) and number of positive cores (90% vs. 65%, p = 0.014). In total, 86% of patients who received the patient-centered report felt that it helped them better understand their results and should always be provided. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centered pathology reports are associated with significantly higher knowledge about a prostate cancer diagnosis. These important health information documents may improve patient-provider communication and help facilitate shared decision-making among patients diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Evaluation of Intense Androgen Deprivation Before Prostatectomy: A Randomized Phase II Trial of Enzalutamide and Leuprolide With or Without Abiraterone.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced prostate cancer have an increased risk of cancer recurrence and mortality. In this phase II trial, we evaluate neoadjuvant enzalutamide and leuprolide (EL) with or without abiraterone and prednisone (ELAP) before radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a biopsy Gleason score of 4 + 3 = 7 or greater, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) greater than 20 ng/mL, or T3 disease (by prostate magnetic resonance imaging). Lymph nodes were required to be smaller than 20 mm. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to ELAP or EL for 24 weeks followed by RP. All specimens underwent central pathology review. The primary end point was pathologic complete response or minimal residual disease (residual tumor ≤ 5 mm). Secondary end points were PSA, surgical staging, positive margins, and safety. Biomarkers associated with pathologic outcomes were explored. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were enrolled at four centers. Most patients had high-risk disease by National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria (n = 65; 87%). The pathologic complete response or minimal residual disease rate was 30% (n = 15 of 50) in ELAP-treated patients and 16% (n = four of 25) in EL-treated patients (two-sided P = .263). Rates of ypT3 disease, positive margins, and positive lymph nodes were similar between arms. Treatment was well-tolerated. Residual tumors in the two arms showed comparable levels of ERG, PTEN, androgen receptor PSA, and glucocorticoid receptor expression. Tumor ERG positivity and PTEN loss were associated with more extensive residual tumors at RP. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant hormone therapy followed by RP in locally advanced prostate cancer resulted in favorable pathologic responses in some patients, with a trend toward improved pathologic outcomes with ELAP. Longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate the impact of therapy on recurrence rates. The potential association of ERG and PTEN alterations with worse outcomes warrants additional investigation.

Continued 5α-Reductase Inhibitor Use after Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and the Risk of Reclassification and Adverse Pathological Outcomes in the PASS.

PURPOSE: Outcomes in patients who enroll in active surveillance programs for prostate cancer while receiving 5α-reductase inhibitors have not been well defined. We sought to determine the association of 5α-reductase inhibitor use with the risk of reclassification in the PASS (Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants in the multicenter PASS were enrolled between 2008 and 2016. Study inclusion criteria were current or never 5α-reductase inhibitors use, Gleason score 3 + 4 or less prostate cancer at diagnosis, less than a 34% core involvement ratio at diagnosis and 1 or more surveillance biopsies. Included in study were 1,009 men, including 107 on 5α-reductase inhibitors and 902 who had never received 5α-reductase inhibitors. Reclassification was defined as increase in the Gleason score and/or an increase to 34% or greater in the ratio of biopsy cores positive for cancer. Adverse pathology at prostatectomy was defined as Gleason 4 + 3 or greater and/or nonorgan confined disease (pT3 or N1). RESULTS: On multivariable analysis there was no difference in reclassification between men who had received and those who had never received 5α-reductase inhibitors (HR 0.81, p = 0.31). Patients who had received 5α-reductase inhibitors were less likely to undergo radical prostatectomy (8% vs 18%, p = 0.01) or any definitive treatment (19% vs 24%, p = 0.04). In the 167 participants who underwent radical prostatectomy there was no suggestion of a difference in the rate of adverse pathology findings at prostatectomy between 5α-reductase inhibitor users and nonusers. CONCLUSIONS: Continued 5α-reductase inhibitor use after an initial diagnosis of prostate cancer was not associated with the risk of reclassification on active surveillance in men in the PASS cohort.

Role of Surveillance Biopsy with No Cancer as a Prognostic Marker for Reclassification: Results from the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients who are on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer will have surveillance prostate needle biopsies (PNBs) without any cancer evident. OBJECTIVE: To define the association between negative surveillance PNBs and risk of reclassification on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: All men were enrolled in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study (PASS) between 2008 and 2016. Men were included if they had Gleason ≤3+4 prostate cancer and <34% core involvement ratio at diagnosis. Men were prescribed surveillance PNBs at 12 and 24 mo after diagnosis and then every 24 mo. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Reclassification was defined as an increase in Gleason grade and/or an increase in the ratio of biopsy cores to cancer to ≥34%. PNB outcomes were defined as follows: (1) no cancer on biopsy, (2) cancer without reclassification, or (3) reclassification. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models were performed to assess the risk of reclassification. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 657 men met inclusion criteria. On first surveillance PNB, 214 (32%) had no cancer, 282 (43%) had cancer but no reclassification, and 161 (25%) reclassified. Among those who did not reclassify, 313 had a second PNB. On second PNB, 120 (38%) had no cancer, 139 (44%) had cancer but no reclassification, and 54 (17%) reclassified. In a multivariable analysis, significant predictors of decreased future reclassification after the first PNB were no cancer on PNB (hazard ratio [HR]=0.50, p=0.008), lower serum prostate-specific antigen, larger prostate size, and lower body mass index. A finding of no cancer on the second PNB was also associated with significantly decreased future reclassification in a multivariable analysis (HR=0.15, p=0.003), regardless of the first PNB result. The major limitation of this study is a relatively small number of patients with long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Men who have a surveillance PNB with no evidence of cancer are significantly less likely to reclassify on AS in the PASS cohort. These findings have implications for tailoring AS protocols. PATIENT SUMMARY: Men on active surveillance for prostate cancer who have a biopsy showing no cancer are at a decreased risk of having worse disease in the future. This may have an impact on how frequently biopsies are required to be performed in the future.

Multiplexed targeted mass spectrometry assays for prostate cancer-associated urinary proteins.

Biomarkers for effective early diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer are still lacking. Multiplexed assays for cancer-associated proteins could be useful for identifying biomarkers for cancer detection and stratification. Herein, we report the development of sensitive targeted mass spectrometry assays for simultaneous quantification of 10 prostate cancer-associated proteins in urine. The diagnostic utility of these markers was evaluated with an initial cohort of 20 clinical urine samples. Individual marker concentration was normalized against the measured urinary prostate-specific antigen level as a reference of prostate-specific secretion. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves for the 10 proteins ranged from 0.75 for CXL14 to 0.87 for CEAM5. Furthermore, MMP9 level was found to be significantly higher in patients with high Gleason scores, suggesting a potential of MMP9 as a marker for risk level assessment. Taken together, our work illustrated the feasibility of accurate multiplexed measurements of low-abundance cancer-associated proteins in urine and provided a viable path forward for preclinical verification of candidate biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Timing of Adverse Prostate Cancer Reclassification on First Surveillance Biopsy: Results from the Canary Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Study.

PURPOSE: During active surveillance for localized prostate cancer, the timing of the first surveillance biopsy varies. We analyzed the Canary PASS (Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Study) to determine biopsy timing influence on rates of prostate cancer adverse reclassification at the first active surveillance biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 1,085 participants in PASS, 421 had fewer than 34% of cores involved with cancer and Gleason sum 6 or less, and thereafter underwent on-study active surveillance biopsy. Reclassification was defined as an increase in Gleason sum and/or 34% or more of cores with prostate cancer. First active surveillance biopsy reclassification rates were categorized as less than 8, 8 to 13 and greater than 13 months after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression determined association between reclassification and first biopsy timing. RESULTS: Of 421 men, 89 (21.1%) experienced reclassification at the first active surveillance biopsy. Median time from prostate cancer diagnosis to first active surveillance biopsy was 11 months (IQR 7.8-13.8). Reclassification rates at less than 8, 8 to 13 and greater than 13 months were 24%, 19% and 22% (p = 0.65). On multivariable analysis, compared to men biopsied at less than 8 months the OR of reclassification at 8 to 13 and greater than 13 months were 0.88 (95% CI 0.5,1.6) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.5,1.9), respectively. Prostate specific antigen density 0.15 or greater (referent less than 0.15, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1, 4.1) and body mass index 35 kg/m2 or greater (referent less than 25 kg/m2, OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1,5.7) were associated with increased odds of reclassification. CONCLUSIONS: Timing of the first active surveillance biopsy was not associated with increased adverse reclassification but prostate specific antigen density and body mass index were. In low risk patients on active surveillance, it may be reasonable to perform the first active surveillance biopsy at a later time, reducing the overall cost and morbidity of active surveillance.

Evaluating the Four Kallikrein Panel of the 4Kscore for Prediction of High-grade Prostate Cancer in Men in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of Gleason 6 prostate cancer can leave uncertainty about the presence of undetected aggressive disease. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of a four kallikrein (4K) panel in predicting the presence of high-grade cancer in men on active surveillance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Plasma collected before the first and subsequent surveillance biopsies was assessed for 718 men prospectively enrolled in the multi-institutional Canary PASS trial. Biopsy data were split 2:1 into training and test sets. We developed statistical models that included clinical information and either the 4Kpanel or serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The endpoint was reclassification to Gleason ≥7. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses and area under the curve (AUC) to assess discriminatory capacity, and decision curve analysis (DCA) to report clinical net benefit. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Significant predictors for reclassification were 4Kpanel (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-1.81) or PSA (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.53-2.91), ≥20% cores positive (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.33-3.32), two or more prior negative biopsies (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.85), prostate volume (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31-0.70), and body mass index (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14). ROC curve analysis comparing 4K and base models indicated that the 4Kpanel improved accuracy for predicting reclassification (AUC 0.78 vs 0.74) at the first surveillance biopsy. Both models performed comparably for prediction of reclassification at subsequent biopsies (AUC 0.75 vs 0.76). In DCA, both models showed higher net benefit compared to biopsy-all and biopsy-none strategies. Limitations include the single cohort nature of the study and the small numbers; results should be validated in another cohort before clinical use. CONCLUSIONS: The 4Kpanel provided incremental value over routine clinical information in predicting high-grade cancer in the first biopsy after diagnosis. The 4Kpanel did not add predictive value to the base model at subsequent surveillance biopsies. PATIENT SUMMARY: Active surveillance is a management strategy for many low-grade prostate cancers. Repeat biopsies monitor for previously undetected high-grade cancer. We show that a model with clinical variables, including a panel of four kallikreins, indicates the presence of high-grade cancer before a biopsy is performed.

Docetaxel and mitoxantrone before radical prostatectomy in men with high-risk prostate cancer: 10-year follow-up and immune correlates.

The aims of this study were to report the clinical outcomes in a cohort of men with high-risk prostate cancer treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel and mitoxantrone 10 years after treatment, identify pretreatment clinical parameters that may be predictors of recurrence, and describe tumor-infiltrating leukocytes present in radical prostatectomy specimens. We conducted a phase I/II study of neoadjuvant docetaxel and mitoxantrone before radical prostatectomy in high-risk localized prostate cancer to determine the feasibility of this combination and predictors of prostate cancer recurrence after cytotoxic chemotherapy. After 10 years of follow-up, 34 (63%) of 54 participants experience a recurrence. In univariate analysis, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (P=0.01), pathological stage (P=0.03), lymph node status (P<0.0001), seminal vesicle invasion (P=0.003), and tissue vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression (P=0.016) were significantly associated with recurrence. In multivariate analysis, only lymph node status, PSA density, and VEGF expression were significant predictors of disease recurrence. We used a tissue microarray for the first 50 participants to characterize the tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and evaluate them for association with recurrence. We measured CD3, CD4, CD8, FoxP3, CD20, CD15, CD68, and CD163 by immunohistochemistry in both tumor and normal prostate specimens, but did not find an association between immunophenotype and recurrence. There was a significantly different density of CD68 and CD163 cells between normal and tumor tissue. Lymph node status, PSA density, and tissue VEGF expression predict recurrence after chemotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer. Additional studies are needed to determine the potential benefit of chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting.

Extreme Gleason Upgrading From Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy: A Population-based Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the risk factors associated with the odds of extreme Gleason upgrading at radical prostatectomy (RP) (defined as a Gleason prognostic group score increase of ≥2), we utilized a large, population-based cancer registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiologic, and End Results database was queried (2010-2011) for all patients diagnosed with Gleason 3 + 3 or 3 + 4 on prostate needle biopsy. Available clinicopathologic factors and the odds of upgrading and extreme upgrading at RP were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 12,459 patients were identified, with a median age of 61 (interquartile range: 56-65) and a diagnostic prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 5.5 ng/mL (interquartile range: 4.3-7.5). Upgrading was observed in 34% of men, including 44% of 7402 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 and 19% of 5057 patients with Gleason 3 + 4 disease. Age, clinical stage, diagnostic PSA, and % prostate needle biopsy cores positive were independently associated with odds of any upgrading at RP. In baseline Gleason 3 + 3 disease, extreme upgrading was observed in 6%, with increasing age, diagnostic PSA, and >50% core positivity associated with increased odds. In baseline Gleason 3 + 4 disease, extreme upgrading was observed in 4%, with diagnostic PSA and palpable disease remaining predictive. Positive surgical margins were significantly higher in patients with extreme upgrading at RP (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Gleason upgrading at RP is common in this large population-based cohort, including extreme upgrading in a clinically significant portion.

Preliminary Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic Versus Open Radical Cystectomy in Elderly Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains highly morbid despite improving surgical techniques. As the median age of diagnosis is 73, many patients are elderly at the time of cystectomy. We compare perioperative surgical outcomes in elderly patients undergoing robotic vs open radical cystectomy (RC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients >75 years at time of RC were identified. Demographic, clinicopathologic, and perioperative variables were examined. Estimated blood loss (EBL) and length of stay (LOS) data were collected with multivariate linear regression analysis performed to assess whether technique was independently associated with outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients >75 years of age underwent cystectomy for MIBC (58 open, 29 robotic). Mean age was 79.6 (±3.2) and 79.2 (±3.5) for open and robotic groups, respectively (p = 0.64). There were no significant differences in baseline comorbidities, clinical or pathologic stage, or use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The mean number of lymph nodes removed was similar (p = 0.08). Robotic cystectomy had significantly longer mean OR times (p < 0.001). On multivariate analyses, robotic surgery was associated with -389cc less EBL (95% CI -547 to -230, p < 0.001) and a -1.5-day-shortened LOS (95%CI -2.9 to -0.2, p = 0.02) compared with open surgery. There were no significant differences in surgical complications or 90-day readmission rates between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic cystectomy is safe and feasible in an elderly population. We observed longer OR times with robotic surgery, but with decreased EBL, shorter hospital stays, and comparable complication and readmission rates with open RC. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.