Gene-Transcript Expression in Urine Supernatant and Urine Cell-Sediment Are Different but Equally Useful for Detecting Prostate Cancer.

There is considerable interest in urine as a non-invasive liquid biopsy to detect prostate cancer (PCa). PCa-specific transcripts such as the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion gene can be found in both urine extracellular vesicles (EVs) and urine cell-sediment (Cell) but the relative usefulness of these and other genes in each fraction in PCa detection has not been fully elucidated. Urine samples from 76 men (PCa n = 40, non-cancer n = 36) were analysed by NanoString for 154 PCa-associated genes-probes, 11 tissue-specific, and six housekeeping. Comparison to qRT-PCR data for four genes (PCA3, OR51E2, FOLH1, and RPLP2) was strong (r = 0.51-0.95, Spearman p < 0.00001). Comparing EV to Cells, differential gene expression analysis found 57 gene-probes significantly more highly expressed in 100 ng of amplified cDNA products from the EV fraction, and 26 in Cells (p < 0.05; edgeR). Expression levels of prostate-specific genes (KLK2, KLK3) measured were ~20× higher in EVs, while PTPRC (white-blood Cells) was ~1000× higher in Cells. Boruta analysis identified 11 gene-probes as useful in detecting PCa: two were useful in both fractions (PCA3, HOXC6), five in EVs alone (GJB1, RPS10, TMPRSS2:ERG, ERG_Exons_4-5, HPN) and four from Cell (ERG_Exons_6-7, OR51E2, SPINK1, IMPDH2), suggesting that it is beneficial to fractionate whole urine prior to analysis. The five housekeeping genes were not significantly differentially expressed between PCa and non-cancer samples. Expression signatures from Cell, EV and combined data did not show evidence for one fraction providing superior information over the other.

Microbiomes of Urine and the Prostate Are Linked to Human Prostate Cancer Risk Groups.

BACKGROUND: Bacteria play a suspected role in the development of several cancer types, and associations between the presence of particular bacteria and prostate cancer have been reported. OBJECTIVE: To provide improved characterisation of the prostate and urine microbiome and to investigate the prognostic potential of the bacteria present. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Microbiome profiles were interrogated in sample collections of patient urine (sediment microscopy: n = 318, 16S ribosomal amplicon sequencing: n = 46; and extracellular vesicle RNA-seq: n = 40) and cancer tissue (n = 204). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Microbiomes were assessed using anaerobic culture, population-level 16S analysis, RNA-seq, and whole genome DNA sequencing. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We demonstrate an association between the presence of bacteria in urine sediments and higher D'Amico risk prostate cancer (discovery, n = 215 patients, p < 0.001; validation, n = 103, p < 0.001, χ2 test for trend). Characterisation of the bacterial community led to the (1) identification of four novel bacteria (Porphyromonas sp. nov., Varibaculum sp. nov., Peptoniphilus sp. nov., and Fenollaria sp. nov.) that were frequently found in patient urine, and (2) definition of a patient subgroup associated with metastasis development (p = 0.015, log-rank test). The presence of five specific anaerobic genera, which includes three of the novel isolates, was associated with cancer risk group, in urine sediment (p = 0.045, log-rank test), urine extracellular vesicles (p = 0.039), and cancer tissue (p = 0.035), with a meta-analysis hazard ratio for disease progression of 2.60 (95% confidence interval: 1.39-4.85; p = 0.003; Cox regression). A limitation is that functional links to cancer development are not yet established. CONCLUSIONS: This study characterises prostate and urine microbiomes, and indicates that specific anaerobic bacteria genera have prognostic potential. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we investigated the presence of bacteria in patient urine and the prostate. We identified four novel bacteria and suggest a potential prognostic utility for the microbiome in prostate cancer.

A four-group urine risk classifier for predicting outcomes in patients with prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a risk classifier using urine-derived extracellular vesicle (EV)-RNA capable of providing diagnostic information on disease status prior to biopsy, and prognostic information for men on active surveillance (AS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Post-digital rectal examination urine-derived EV-RNA expression profiles (n = 535, multiple centres) were interrogated with a curated NanoString panel. A LASSO-based continuation ratio model was built to generate four prostate urine risk (PUR) signatures for predicting the probability of normal tissue (PUR-1), D'Amico low-risk (PUR-2), intermediate-risk (PUR-3), and high-risk (PUR-4) prostate cancer. This model was applied to a test cohort (n = 177) for diagnostic evaluation, and to an AS sub-cohort (n = 87) for prognostic evaluation. RESULTS: Each PUR signature was significantly associated with its corresponding clinical category (P < 0.001). PUR-4 status predicted the presence of clinically significant intermediate- or high-risk disease (area under the curve = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.84). Application of PUR provided a net benefit over current clinical practice. In an AS sub-cohort (n = 87), groups defined by PUR status and proportion of PUR-4 had a significant association with time to progression (interquartile range hazard ratio [HR] 2.86, 95% CI 1.83-4.47; P < 0.001). PUR-4, when used continuously, dichotomized patient groups with differential progression rates of 10% and 60% 5 years after urine collection (HR 8.23, 95% CI 3.26-20.81; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Urine-derived EV-RNA can provide diagnostic information on aggressive prostate cancer prior to biopsy, and prognostic information for men on AS. PUR represents a new and versatile biomarker that could result in substantial alterations to current treatment of patients with prostate cancer.

Mutation detection in formalin-fixed prostate cancer biopsies taken at the time of diagnosis using next-generation DNA sequencing.

AIMS: Assessing whether next-generation DNA sequencing (NGS) can be used to screen prostate cancer for multiple gene alterations in men routinely diagnosed with this disease and/or who are entered into clinical trials. Previous studies are limited and have reported only low success rates. METHODS: We marked areas of cancer on H&E-stained sections from formalin-fixed needle biopsies, and used these as templates to dissect cancer-rich tissue from adjacent unstained sections. DNA was prepared using a Qiagen protocol modified to maximise DNA yield. The DNA was screened simultaneously for mutations in 365 cancer-related genes using an Illumina HiSeq 2000 NGS platform. RESULTS: From 63 prostate cancers examined, 59(94%) of the samples yielded at least 30 ng of DNA, the minimum amount of DNA considered suitable for NGS analysis. Patients in the D'Amico high-risk group yielded an average of 1033 ng, intermediate-risk patients 401 ng, and low-risk patients 97 ng. NGS of eight samples selected from high-risk and intermediate-risk groups gave a median exon read depth of 962 and detected TMPRRS2-ERG fusions, as well as a variety of mutations including those in the SPOP, TP53, ATM, MEN1, NBPF10, NCOR2, PIK3CB and MAP2K5 (MEK5) genes. CONCLUSIONS: Using the methods presented here, NGS technologies can be used to screen a high proportion of patients with prostate cancer for mutations in cancer-related genes in tissue samples opening up its general use in the context of clinical trials or routine diagnosis.

Pus swabs in incision and drainage of perianal abscesses: what is the point?

BACKGROUND: The clinical effectiveness of pus swabs for microbiological analysis during incision and drainage of perianal abscess is controversial. Its cost implication is often overlooked. The present study aimed to determine if submission of pus swabs can be avoided without a negative effect on outcome. METHODS: All consecutive cases of incision and drainage of perianal abscess between January 2004 and 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, microbiological results, and clinical outcome with a follow-up of 6 months were assessed. RESULTS: A review of patient records revealed 235 cases (59 F:176 M; age range: 6-99 years; median: 37 years). In 38 cases no swabs were taken; in 28 cases (12%), 106 cases (45%), and 16 cases (7%) swabs contained skin flora organisms, coliform/Bacteroides, and sterile, respectively. Within 6 months follow-up, 185 of the abscesses had healed, leaving 39 cases of fistula (25 cases had setons remained in situ for their fistulas at 6 months follow-up) and 11 patients were lost from follow-up. Fistulas were not associated with coliform/Bacteroides found on microbiological analysis (P > 0.05). In only 4 cases (1.7%) were the swab results mentioned in follow-up reports. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons tend not to review microbiological results at patient follow-up. Furthermore, the preliminary findings suggest that microbiological results have no correlation with presence of fistulas or prognosis. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to assess whether abandoning submission of pus swabs will affect clinical effectiveness of treatment in patients with perianal abscess.