Cumulative cancer locations on prostate biopsy and active surveillance outcomes in the MRI era.

BACKGROUND: To validate the use of a cumulative cancer locations (CCLO) score, a measurement of tumor volume on biopsy, and to develop a novel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-informed CCLO (mCCLO) score to predict clinical outcomes on active surveillance (AS). METHODS: The CCLO score is a sum of uniquely involved sextants with prostate cancer on diagnostic + confirmatory biopsy. The mCCLO score incorporates MRI findings into the CCLO score. Participants included 1284 individuals enrolled on AS between 1994 and 2022, 343 of whom underwent prostate MRI. The primary outcome was grade reclassification (GR) to grade group ≥2 disease; the secondary outcome was receipt of definitive treatment. RESULTS: Increasing CCLO and mCCLO risk groups were associated with higher risk of GR and undergoing definitive treatment (both p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, increasing mCCLO score was associated with higher risk of GR and receipt of definitive treatment (hazard ratios [HRs] per 1-unit increase: 1.26 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.41] and 1.21 [95% CI: 1.07-1.36], respectively). The model using mCCLO score to predict GR (c-index: 0.671; 95% CI: 0.621-0.721) performed at least as well as models using the number of cores positive for cancer (0.664 [0.613-0.715]; p = 0.7) and the maximum percentage of cancer in a core (0.641 [0.585-0.696]; p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The CCLO score is a valid, objective metric to predict GR and receipt of treatment in a large AS cohort. The ability of the MRI-informed mCCLO to predict GR is on par with traditional metrics of tumor volume but is more descriptive and may benefit from greater reproducibility. The mCCLO score can be implemented as a shorthand, informative tool for counseling patients about whether to remain on AS.

Risk of Biochemical Recurrence in Patients With Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer With Extraprostatic Extension Treated With Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: We sought to examine the association of extraprostatic extension (EPE) with biochemical recurrence (BCR) separately in men with Grade Group (GG) 1 and GG2 prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed our institutional database of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for PCa between 2005 and 2022 and identified patients with GG1 and GG2 disease on final pathology. Fine-Gray competing risk models with an interaction between EPE (yes vs no) and GG (GG1 vs GG2) were used to examine the relationship between disease group and BCR-free survival. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 6309 men, of whom 169/2740 (6.2%) with GG1 disease had EPE while 1013/3569 (28.4%) with GG2 disease had EPE. Median follow-up was 4 years. BCR occurred in 400/6309 (6.3%) patients. For men with GG1, there was no statistically significant difference in BCR-free survival for men with vs without EPE (subdistribution HR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.37-2.09). However, for GG2 patients BCR-free survival was significantly worse for those with vs without EPE (subdistribution HR = 1.97, 95% CI: 1.54-2.52). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a subset of GG1 PCas capable of invading through the prostatic capsule, patients with GG1 PCa and EPE at prostatectomy experience similar biochemical recurrence and survival outcomes compared to GG1 patients without EPE. However, among men with GG2, EPE connotes a worse prognosis.

Clinical Significance of Perineural Invasion in Men With Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of perineural invasion in men on active surveillance for Grade Group 1 prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 1,969 men with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer and at least 1 follow-up biopsy. A time-dependent Cox model and a logistic regression model were used to assess the association between biopsy-detected perineural invasion and grade reclassification (defined as the detection of Grade Group ≥2 prostate cancer on a surveillance biopsy), and adverse pathology (defined as Grade Group ≥3 ± seminal vesicle invasion ± lymph node involvement) at radical prostatectomy, respectively. RESULTS: The 198 men with perineural invasion detected during active surveillance had lower rates of grade reclassification-free survival than those without perineural invasion (P < .001). On multivariable analysis perineural invasion was significantly associated with grade reclassification (HR 3.25, 95% CI 2.54-4.16, P < .001); an association that persisted in the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging subset. At radical prostatectomy, men with biopsy-detected perineural invasion had more extraprostatic extension than men without perineural invasion (Relative Risk 1.71, 95% CI 1.15-2.56). However, on multivariable analysis biopsy-detected perineural invasion was not associated with adverse pathology (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.27-1.68, P = .40) and these patients did not exhibit more biochemical recurrence at 5 years (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Perineural invasion during active surveillance was associated with grade reclassification. At radical prostatectomy biopsy-detected perineural invasion patients exhibited more extraprostatic extension but biopsy-detected perineural invasion was not independently associated with more adverse pathology. In addition, these patients did not have more biochemical recurrence during follow-up. Perineural invasion should not preclude Grade Group 1 patients from active surveillance but they may warrant more stringent monitoring.

Identifying Men Who Can Remain on Active Surveillance Despite Biopsy Reclassification to Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Men on active surveillance with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer who reclassify to Grade Group 2 on surveillance biopsy often leave active surveillance. We aimed to identify subgroups of men who can safely remain on active surveillance despite preoperative reclassification to Grade Group 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 249 active surveillance patients with surveillance biopsies classified as Grade Group 1 or Grade Group 2 who underwent radical prostatectomy. Perineural invasion, cancer volume, linear length and maximum percentage of Gleason pattern 4, and prostate-specific antigen density were evaluated. Radical prostatectomy adverse pathology was defined by any of: pN1; ≥pT3; ≥Grade Group 2 with ≥20% Gleason pattern 4; intraductal carcinoma; large cribriform glands. RESULTS: A multivariable logistic regression model incorporating prostate-specific antigen density and perineural invasion stratified radical prostatectomy adverse pathology risk among Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 active surveillance patients. 57% (39/68) of Grade Group 1 men reclassified to Grade Group 2 while on active surveillance had favorable radical prostatectomy pathology. Those without biopsy perineural invasion and with low prostate-specific antigen density were more likely to have favorable radical prostatectomy pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Most Grade Group 1 men who enter active surveillance and subsequently reclassify to Grade Group 2 have favorable findings at radical prostatectomy and can remain on active surveillance. Among patients reclassified to Grade Group 2, those with low prostate-specific antigen density and without perineural invasion had the lowest risk of radical prostatectomy adverse pathology, comparable to (or below) that of Grade Group 1 patients who were not reclassified to Grade Group 2 preoperatively. Prostate-specific antigen density and perineural invasion stratify risk in active surveillance patients reclassified to Grade Group 2 and, if concordant with other clinicopathological and radiographic findings, can enable more patients to remain on active surveillance. Reclassification to Grade Group 2 alone should not disqualify men from remaining on active surveillance.

The role of genetic testing in prostate cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of the current role of genetic testing in prostate cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have uncovered few but highly penetrant rare pathogenic mutations (RPMs), in genes, such as BRCA2, with strong prostate cancer risk and outcomes associations. Over 260 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have also been identified, each associated with small incremental prostate cancer risk and when combined in a polygenic risk score (PRS), they provide strong prostate cancer risk prediction but do not seem to predict outcomes. Tumor tissue sequencing can also help identify actionable somatic mutations in many patients with advanced prostate cancer and inform on their risk of harboring a germline pathogenic mutation. SUMMARY: RPM testing, PRS testing, and tumor sequencing all have current and/or potential future roles in personalized prostate cancer care.

Active Surveillance versus Immediate Intervention for Small Renal Masses: A Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Decision Analysis.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance (AS) with the possibility of delayed intervention (DI) is emerging as a safe alternative to immediate intervention for many patients with small renal masses (SRMs). However, limited comparative data exist to inform the most appropriate management strategy for SRMs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Decision analytic Markov modeling was performed to estimate the health outcomes and costs of 4 management strategies for 65-year-old patients with an incidental SRM: AS (with possible DI), immediate partial nephrectomy, radical nephrectomy, and thermal ablation. Mortality, direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were evaluated over 10 years. RESULTS: The 10-year all-cause mortality was 22.6% for AS, 21.9% for immediate partial nephrectomy, 22.4% for immediate radical nephrectomy, and 23.7% for immediate thermal ablation. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year, AS was the most cost-effective management strategy. The results were robust in univariate, multivariate, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Clinical decision analysis demonstrated that the tumor's metastatic potential, patient age, individual preferences, and health status were important factors influencing the optimal management strategy. Notably, if the annual probability of metastatic progression from AS was sufficiently low (under 0.35%-0.45% for most ages at baseline), consistent with the typical metastatic potential of SRMs <2 cm, AS would achieve higher health utilities than the other strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to immediate intervention, AS with timely DI offers a safe and cost-effective approach to managing patients with SRMs. For patients harboring tumors of very low metastatic potential, AS may lead to better patient outcomes than immediate intervention.

New imaging modalities to consider for men with prostate cancer on active surveillance.

PURPOSE: To discuss the potential utility of newer imaging modalities including micro-ultrasound and PSMA-PET for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, technologies that may gain roles as adjuncts to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the active surveillance (AS) setting. METHODS: Narrative review of two new imaging modalities used for primary prostate cancer through April 2021. A targeted search was performed to identify current relevant literature on the role of new imaging modalities for primary prostate cancer using search terms "micro-ultrasound," "molecular imaging," "prostate cancer," "active surveillance," "multiparametric MRI," "PI-RADS," "PRI-MUS," and "detection rate." In addition, references of included articles were screened for further relevant publications. RESULTS: Micro-ultrasound (micro-US) and prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) are increasing in their use and applicability to prostate cancer imaging. Micro-US is used for cancer detection and may identify higher grade cancers more accurately than conventional ultrasound, despite technical hurdles in its initial launch. PSMA-PET is highly sensitive and specific for high-grade and metastatic prostate cancer, though costly and not easily available. Though data are sparse, it may have an emerging role in cancer diagnosis in select localized cases, and in some men considering (or currently on) AS who have indications of more aggressive disease. CONCLUSION: There are very limited data on micro-US and PSMA-PET in AS patients. However, given the ability of these modalities to identify high-grade cancer, their judicious use in AS patients may be of utility in the future.

Association of prostate cancer polygenic risk score with number and laterality of tumor cores in active surveillance patients.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is characterized by its tendency to be multifocal. However, few studies have investigated the endogenous factors that explain the multifocal disease. The primary objective of the current study is to test whether inherited PCa risk is associated with multifocal tumors in PCa patients. METHODS: Subjects in this study were PCa patients of European ancestry undergoing active surveillance at Johns Hopkins Hospital (N = 805) and NorthShore University HealthSystem (N = 432). The inherited risk was measured by genetic risk score (GRS), an odds ratio-weighted and population-standardized polygenic risk score based on known risk-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms. PCa multifocality was indirectly measured by the number and laterality of positive tumor cores from a 12-core systematic biopsy. RESULTS: In the combined cohort, 35.7% and 66.3% of patients had ≥2 tumor cores at the initial diagnostic biopsy and on at least one subsequent surveillance biopsy, respectively. For tumor laterality, 7.8% and 47.8% of patients had bilateral tumor cores at diagnostic and surveillance biopsies, respectively. We found, for the first time, that patients with higher numbers of positive cores at diagnostic and surveillance biopsies, respectively, had significantly higher mean GRS values; p = .01 and p = 5.94E-04. Additionally, patients with bilateral tumors at diagnostic and surveillance biopsies, respectively, had significantly higher mean GRS values than those with unilateral tumors; p = .04 and p = .01. In contrast, no association was found between GRS and maximum core length of tumor or tumor grade at diagnostic/surveillance biopsies (all p > .05). Finally, we observed a modest trend that patients with higher GRS quartiles had a higher risk for tumor upgrading on surveillance biopsies. The trend, however, was not statistically significant (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The associations of GRS with two measurements of PCa multifocality (core numbers and laterality) provide novel and consistent evidence for the link between inherited PCa risk and multifocal tumors.

Rapid Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer Disease Progression Using Paper Spray Ionization Mass Spectrometry.

The limitation of prostate specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis is well-recognized. The Gleason score (GS) has been the most widely used grading system for prostate tumor differentiation and represents the best-established prognostic indicator for prostate cancer progression. However, a rapid and sensitive noninvasive diagnostic marker that differentiates GS-based prostate cancer disease progression is needed. As PC is becoming a leading cause of cancer related death for men in the U.S. and worldwide, an immediate need exists for an improved, sensitive, noninvasive, and rapid diagnostic test for PC screening. Here, we employed paper spray ionization-mass spectrometry (PSI MS)-based global metabolomics of urine liquid biopsies to distinguish between healthy (negative for any prostate specific health problems) and progressive PC states (low grade PC such as GS6 and high-grade PC such as GS7, GS8, and GS9). For PSI-MS-based direct untargeted metabolic investigation, a raw urine sample was directly pipetted onto a triangular paper substrate, without any additional sample preparation. Multivariate statistical analysis revealed distinct GS-specific metabolic signatures compared to a healthy control. Variable importance in projection from partial least-squares-discriminant analysis showed distinct metabolic patterns that were correlatively elevated with progressive disease and could serve as biomarkers for diagnosis of prostate cancer risk categorization.

Specific Detection of Prostate Cancer Cells in Urine by RNA In Situ Hybridization.

PURPOSE: Noninvasive tests that can accurately detect prostate cancer are urgently needed for prostate cancer diagnosis, surveillance and prognosis. Exfoliated prostate cells captured in urine represent a promising resource for noninvasive detection of prostate cancer. We investigated performance of a novel cell-based urine test for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We previously developed a multiplex RNA in situ hybridization assay targeting NKX3-1, PRAC1 and PCA3 that enables identification and quantification of malignant and benign prostate cells released into urine. We investigated application of the assay for prostate cancer detection in a cohort of 98 patients suspected of harboring prostate cancer. Urine was collected following digital rectal examination, and the sediment was isolated and evaluated by RNA in situ hybridization. Samples were scored based on cellular expression of RNA in situ hybridization targets. Cells of prostate origin were defined by positivity for NKX3-1 and/or PRAC1, and prostate cancer cells by positivity for PCA3. RESULTS: Prostate cells (NKX3-1/PRAC1+ cells) were detected in 69 samples, among which 20 were positive for PCA3 (ie positive for prostate cancer cells). Comparison of RNA in situ hybridization results with biopsy outcome and clinical variables revealed that positivity for cancer by RNA in situ hybridization significantly correlated with intermediate/high risk cancer (p=0.003), PSA density (p=0.022), significant disease (p <0.0001) and Gleason score (p=0.003). The test was 95% specific and 51% sensitive for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of exfoliated prostate cancer cells in urine by RNA in situ hybridization provides a novel tool for highly specific and noninvasive detection of prostate cancer.

Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Improves the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer among Men on Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: Transperineal prostate biopsy offers improved sampling of the anterior prostate compared to the transrectal approach. The objective of this study was to determine if transperineal prostate biopsy is associated with an increased incidence of cancer upgrading among men on active surveillance for very low or low risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our active surveillance registry was queried to identify patients who underwent a surveillance biopsy following the introduction of transperineal prostate biopsy at our institution. Patients were dichotomized by the type of biopsy performed. The baseline characteristics and rates of cancer upgrading were compared between groups. RESULTS: Between November 2017 and June 2020, 790 men with very low or low risk prostate cancer underwent a surveillance biopsy. In total, 59 of 279 men (21.2%) in the transperineal prostate biopsy group were upgraded to grade group ≥2 as compared to 75 of 511 (14.7%) in the transrectal biopsy group (p=0.01). Among patients who were upgraded to grade group ≥2, 26 of 59 (44%) had grade group ≥2 detected in the anterior/transition zone with transperineal prostate biopsy compared to 14 of 75 (18.7%) with transrectal biopsy (p=0.01). Additionally, 17 of 279 men (6.1%) who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy were upgraded to grade group ≥3 vs 17 of 511 (3.3%) who underwent transrectal biopsy (p=0.05). After adjusting for age, prostate specific antigen density, use of magnetic resonance imaging, and number of prior transrectal biopsies, transperineal prostate biopsy was significantly associated with upgrading to grade group ≥2 (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.11-2.19, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among men on active surveillance for very low or low risk prostate cancer, transperineal prostate biopsy was associated with an increased likelihood of upgrading to clinically significant prostate cancer. This is likely due to improved sampling of the anterior prostate with the transperineal approach.

Factors Associated with Time to Conversion from Active Surveillance to Treatment for Prostate Cancer in a Multi-Institutional Cohort.

PURPOSE: We examined the demographic and clinicopathological parameters associated with the time to convert from active surveillance to treatment among men with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional cohort of 7,279 patients managed with active surveillance had data and biospecimens collected for germline genetic analyses. RESULTS: Of 6,775 men included in the analysis, 2,260 (33.4%) converted to treatment at a median followup of 6.7 years. Earlier conversion was associated with higher Gleason grade groups (GG2 vs GG1 adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.57, 95% CI 1.36-1.82; ≥GG3 vs GG1 aHR 1.77, 95% CI 1.29-2.43), serum prostate specific antigen concentrations (aHR per 5 ng/ml increment 1.18, 95% CI 1.11-1.25), tumor stages (cT2 vs cT1 aHR 1.58, 95% CI 1.41-1.77; ≥cT3 vs cT1 aHR 4.36, 95% CI 3.19-5.96) and number of cancerous biopsy cores (3 vs 1-2 cores aHR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.84; ≥4 vs 1-2 cores aHR 3.29, 95% CI 2.94-3.69), and younger age (age continuous per 5-year increase aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99). Patients with high-volume GG1 tumors had a shorter interval to conversion than those with low-volume GG1 tumors and behaved like the higher-risk patients. We found no significant association between the time to conversion and self-reported race or genetic ancestry. CONCLUSIONS: A shorter time to conversion from active surveillance to treatment was associated with higher-risk clinicopathological tumor features. Furthermore, patients with high-volume GG1 tumors behaved similarly to those with intermediate and high-risk tumors. An exploratory analysis of self-reported race and genetic ancestry revealed no association with the time to conversion.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Transurethral Ultrasound Ablation of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation uses directional thermal ultrasound under magnetic resonance imaging thermometry feedback control for prostatic ablation. We report 12-month outcomes from a prospective multicenter trial (TACT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 115 men with favorable to intermediate risk prostate cancer across 13 centers were treated with whole gland ablation sparing the urethra and apical sphincter. The co-primary 12-month endpoints were safety and efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 72 (63%) had grade group 2 and 77 (67%) had NCCN® intermediate risk disease. Median treatment delivery time was 51 minutes with 98% (IQR 95-99) thermal coverage of target volume and spatial ablation precision of ±1.4 mm on magnetic resonance imaging thermometry. Grade 3 adverse events occurred in 9 (8%) men. The primary endpoint (U.S. Food and Drug Administration mandated) of prostate specific antigen reduction ≥75% was achieved in 110 of 115 (96%) with median prostate specific antigen reduction of 95% and nadir of 0.34 ng/ml. Median prostate volume decreased from 37 to 3 cc. Among 68 men with pretreatment grade group 2 disease, 52 (79%) were free of grade group 2 disease on 12-month biopsy. Of 111 men with 12-month biopsy data, 72 (65%) had no evidence of cancer. Erections (International Index of Erectile Function question 2 score 2 or greater) were maintained/regained in 69 of 92 (75%). Multivariate predictors of persistent grade group 2 at 12 months included intraprostatic calcifications at screening, suboptimal magnetic resonance imaging thermal coverage of target volume and a PI-RADS™ 3 or greater lesion at 12-month magnetic resonance imaging (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The TACT study of magnetic resonance imaging-guided transurethral ultrasound whole gland ablation in men with localized prostate cancer demonstrated effective tissue ablation and prostate specific antigen reduction with low rates of toxicity and residual disease.

Complications after open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and association with postoperative opioid use: an analysis of data from the PREVENTER trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate perioperative complications for open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and robot-assisted RP (RARP) for patients enrolled in the PREvention of VENous ThromboEmbolism Following Radical Prostatectomy (PREVENTER; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03006562) trial, to determine predictors and impact on opioid consumption. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort of 500 patients undergoing ORP and RARP was followed to determine rates of complications and opioid use. Complications were classified 30 days after RP using the Clavien-Dindo system. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared using appropriate statistical tests. Logistic and linear regressions were performed to identify predictors of complications and evaluate the relationship between complications and postoperative opioid use. RESULTS: A total of 124 (24.8%) men underwent ORP and 376 (75.2%) RARP, with 418 (83.6%) receiving pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND). While 83 patients (16.6%) had complications, only 19 (3.8%) were major (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III), with no differences by surgical approach. PLND (odds ratio [OR] 2.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-8.71; P = 0.03) and Stage pT3b (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.23-6.00;P = 0.01) were the only predictors of complications after controlling for potential confounders. Patients who had complications had greater inpatient (P = 0.02) and outpatient (P = 0.005) opioid use, which persisted after controlling for patient-reported pain, attending surgeon variation, surgical approach, and undergoing PLND (inpatient ß:77.2, 95% CI 17.9-136.5,P = 0.03; and outpatient ß:21.9, 95% CI 4.7-39.1,P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In an analysis of prospectively collected data, overall and major complications rates did not differ by surgical approach. Patients receiving PLND and with Stage pT3b disease had more complications. Complications were independently associated with higher inpatient and outpatient postoperative opioid use.

A prospective comparative study of routine versus deferred pelvic drain placement after radical prostatectomy: impact on complications and opioid use.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association of post-RP drain placement with post-operative complications and opioid use at a high-volume institution. METHODS: A prospective, comparative cohort study of patients undergoing robot-assisted or open RP was conducted. Patients for two surgeons did not routinely receive pelvic drains ("No Drain" arm), while the remainder routinely placed drains ("Drain" arm). Outcomes were evaluated at 30 days including Clavien-Dindo complications and opioid use. Intention-to-treat primary analysis and additional secondary analyses were performed using appropriate statistical tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 498 total patients, 144 (28.9%) were in the No Drain arm (all robot-assisted) and 354 (71.1%) in the Drain arm. In the No Drain arm, 19 (13.2%) intraoperatively were chosen to receive drains. There was no difference in overall or major (Clavien ≥ 3) complications between groups (p = 0.2 and 0.4, respectively). Drain deferral did not predict complications on multivariable analysis adjusted for age, BMI, comorbidities, clinical risk, surgical approach, operating time, lymphadenectomy, and number of nodes removed [OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.34-1.11, p = 0.10]; nor did it predict symptomatic fluid collection, adjusting for lymphadenectomy and nodes removed [OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.43-3.60, p = 0.8]. Drain deferral did not decrease opioid use (p = 0.5). Per protocol analysis and restriction to robot-assisted cases demonstrated similar results. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in adverse events, complications, symptomatic collections, or opioid use with deferral of routine drain placement after RP. Experienced surgeons may safely defer drain placement in the majority of robot-assisted RP cases.

Challenges and opportunities in the proteomic characterization of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC): A critical step towards the personalized care of renal cancers.

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common type of kidney cancer, comprising approximately 75% of all kidney tumors. Recent the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) studies have significantly advanced the molecular characterization of RCC and facilitated the development of targeted therapies. Such advances have improved the median survival of patients with advanced disease from less than 10 months prior to 2004 to 30 months by 2011. However, approximately 30% of localized ccRCC patients will nevertheless develop recurrence or metastasis after surgical resection of their tumor. Therefore, it is critical to further analyze potential tumor-associated proteins and their profiles during disease progression. Over the past decade, tremendous effort has been focused on the study of molecular pathways, including genomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics in order to identify potential molecular biomarkers, as well as to facilitate early detection, monitor tumor progression and uncover potentially therapeutic targets. In this review, we focus on recent advances in the proteomic analysis of ccRCC, current strategies and challenges, and perspectives in the field. This insight will highlight the discovery of tumor-associated proteins, and their potential clinical impact on personalized precision-based care in ccRCC.

Downgrading of grade group 2 intermediate-risk prostate cancer from biopsy to radical prostatectomy: Comparison of outcomes and predictors to identify potential candidates for active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: A proportion of men with grade group (GG) 2 intermediate risk (IR) prostate cancer are downgraded to GG1 or harbor favorable pathology (FP, defined as GG1 or GG2 with <5% Gleason pattern 4) at radical prostatectomy (RP). Prediction of downgrading or FP may help identify potential active surveillance candidates within this group that have outcomes similar to biopsy low-risk (LR) disease. METHODS: We performed a comparative cohort study of biopsy LR and IR men who underwent RP at The Johns Hopkins Hospital and Bayview Medical Center between 2005 and 2018. We evaluated pathological outcomes at RP and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were applied and individual predicted probabilities were calculated. RESULTS: Among 2943 biopsy GG2 IR patients, 223 (7.6%) were downgraded to GG1, while 525 (17.8%) had FP; 730 of 1325 biopsy LR patients (55.1%) were upgraded (GG >1). Concordance statistics for final predictive regression models were 0.76 for downgrading and 0.70 for upgrading. Biopsy GG2 IR patients downgrading to GG1 or harboring FP had similar RFS to biopsy LR patients. A cutoff of >10% predicted probability of downgrading (24.7% of patients; hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% CI, 0.89-2.68) or >20% predicted probability of FP (37.0% of patients; HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.81-2.24) led to similar RFS to biopsy LR patients. CONCLUSION: GG2 IR patients who experience downgrading or harbor FP had similar oncologic outcomes as LR patients. The developed models may serve as tools to inform patients about the risks of pathological downgrading/upgrading and help identify a segment of GG2 IR patients who would consider pursuing active surveillance based on predicted probability cutoffs.

Effect of a prospective opioid reduction intervention on opioid prescribing and use after radical prostatectomy: results of the Opioid Reduction Intervention for Open, Laparoscopic, and Endoscopic Surgery (ORIOLES) Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of a prospective opioid reduction intervention after radical prostatectomy (RP; based on a surgery-specific guideline and education) on post-discharge opioid prescribing, use, disposal, and need for additional opioid medication. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, non-randomised, pre-post interventional trial of patients undergoing RP for prostate cancer (August 2017-November 2018) was conducted as part of the Opioid Reduction Intervention for Open, Laparoscopic, and Endoscopic Surgery (ORIOLES) Initiative. An evidence-based intervention including: a discharge sheet, nursing education, and standardised prescribing guideline, was applied with the primary outcome of total oral morphine equivalents (OMEQ) used after RP. Secondary outcomes included opioid prescribing, opioid disposal, need for additional opioid medication, and presence of incisional/post-surgical abdominal pain at 30 days after RP. RESULTS: A total of 214 (Pre-Intervention arm) and 229 (Post-Intervention arm) adult patients were enrolled (100% follow-up). The intervention reduced post-discharge opioid prescribing (from 224.3 to 120.3 mg; -46.4%, P = 0.01), reduced opioid use (from 52.1 to 38.3 mg; -26.5%, P < 0.01), and increased opioid disposal (+13.5%, P < 0.01). Greater prescribing of opioids at discharge, higher body mass index, and use of opioid medication prior to surgery, were independently associated with greater post-discharge opioid use, while history of a chronic pain diagnosis was not statistically significant. In the Post-Intervention cohort, 2.2% of patients needed additional medication for post-surgical pain (0.9% obtained a prescription) and 1.3% initiated long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: A prospective, evidence-based intervention reduced post-discharge opioid prescribing and use, while increasing disposal after RP. Risk factors for increased opioid use were identified. The results support expanding the use of evidence-based opioid reduction interventions to other surgical specialties.

Prostate Health Index and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to predict prostate cancer grade reclassification in active surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the value of combining the Prostate Health Index (PHI) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), tools which have previously been shown to be independently predictive of prostate cancer (PCa) grade reclassification (GR; Gleason score >6), for the purpose of predicting GR at the next surveillance biopsy to reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies for men in PCa active surveillance (AS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2014 and 2019, we retrospectively identified 253 consecutive men in the Johns Hopkins AS programme who had mpMRI and PHI followed by a systematic ± targeted biopsy. PHI and PHI density (PHID) were evaluated across Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2.0 (PI-RADSv2) scores and compared to those with and without GR. Next, the negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) were calculated to compare the diagnostic value of PI-RADSv2 score combined with PHI, PHID, or prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) for GR using their respective first quartile as a cut-off. RESULTS: Of the 253 men, 38 men (15%) had GR. Men with GR had higher PHI values (40.7 vs 32.0, P = 0.001), PHID (0.83 vs 0.57, P = 0.007), and PSAD (0.12 vs 0.10, P = 0.037). A PI-RADSv2 ≤3 alone had a NPV of 91.6% for GR (AUC 0.67). Using a PHI cut-off of 25.6 in addition to PI-RADSv2 ≤3, the NPV and AUC were both increased to 98% and 0.70, respectively. Using a PSAD cut-off of 0.07 ng/mL/mL with PI-RADSv2 had an AUC of 0.69 and NPV of 95.4%. PHI and PI-RADSv2 together could have avoided 20% of biopsies at the cost of missing 2.6% of GRs. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of PHI and mpMRI can aid in the prediction of GR in men on AS and may be useful for decreasing the burden of surveillance prostate biopsies.

Older Age Predicts Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Grade Reclassification to Aggressive Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: Age at prostate cancer diagnosis has been positively associated with prostate cancer specific mortality and in men on active surveillance with a higher risk of biopsy grade reclassification to Gleason score 3 + 4 or greater (Grade Group 2 or greater). However, to our knowledge the association between age and biopsy grade reclassification to an aggressive phenotype (Gleason score 4 + 3 or greater [Grade Group 3 or greater]) has not been explored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1995 to 2016 we followed 1,625 men 41 to 81 years old with NCCN® (National Comprehensive Cancer Network®) very low (68%) or low (32%) risk prostate cancer on active surveillance. We determined the rate of biopsy grade reclassification to Grade Group 3 or greater. Competing risk analysis was applied to evaluate the association between age at enrollment and the risk of biopsy grade reclassification. Additionally, in men who underwent radical prostatectomy after biopsy grade reclassification we assessed the rate of radical prostatectomy grade reclassification (ie radical prostatectomy Grade Group greater than biopsy Grade Group). RESULTS: The 5-year incidence of biopsy grade reclassification to Grade Group 3 or greater was 4%, 7% and 14% in men younger than 60, 60 to 69 and 70 years old or older, respectively (p <0.001). On univariate analysis older age was associated with biopsy grade reclassification to Grade Group 3 or greater (per 10-year increase HR 2.43, p <0.001). On multivariable analysis adjusting for year of diagnosis, race, prostate specific antigen density and cancer volume at diagnosis older age remained associated with biopsy grade reclassification to Grade Group 3 or greater (per 10-year increase HR 2.19, p <0.001). In men who underwent radical prostatectomy after biopsy grade reclassification those who were older had a higher rate of radical prostatectomy grade reclassification (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In men on active surveillance older age at diagnosis was positively associated with biopsy grade reclassification to Grade Group 3 or greater and radical prostatectomy grade reclassification. These observations imply that for many older men, active surveillance as opposed to watchful waiting remains a more appropriate management strategy.