Primary Gleason pattern upgrading in contemporary patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer: implications for future biomarkers and imaging modalities

TY - JOUR

T1 - Primary Gleason pattern upgrading in contemporary patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer: implications for future biomarkers and imaging modalities

AU - Leyh-Bannurah, Sami-Ramzi

AU - Abou-Haidar, Hiba

AU - Dell'Oglio, Paolo

AU - Schiffmann, Jonas

AU - Tian, Zhe

AU - Heinzer, Hans

AU - Huland, Hartwig

AU - Graefen, Markus

AU - Budäus, Lars

AU - Karakiewicz, Pierre I

N1 - © 2016 The Authors BJU International © 2016 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2017/5

Y1 - 2017/5

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively assess the rate of high-grade primary Gleason upgrading (HGPGU) to primary Gleason pattern 4 or 5 in a contemporary cohort of patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer including those who fulfilled Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria, and to develop a tool for HGPGU prediction. HGPGU is a contraindication in most active surveillance (AS) and focal therapy protocols.PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 10 616 patients with localised prostate cancer were treated at a high-volume European tertiary care centre from 2010 to 2015 with radical prostatectomy. Analyses were restricted to 1 819 patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer (17.1%) with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of <10.0 ng/mL, cT1c-cT2a and Gleason score ≤6, and were repeated within 772 of the men (7.3%) who fulfilled the PRIAS criteria for AS (PSA level of ≤10 ng/mL, T1c-T2, Gleason score ≤6, PSA density (PSAD) of <0.2 ng/mL2, ≤2 positive cores). Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted, testing predictors of HGPGU. The final logistic regression model was based on the most informative variables.RESULTS: There was HGPGU in 88 (4.8%) patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer and in 32 (4.1%) of the subgroup who were PRIAS eligible. Multivariable analysis predicting HGPGU for the patients with D'Amico low-risk yielded three independent predictors: age, PSAD, and clinical tumour stage (P = 0.008, P = 0.005 and P = 0.021, respectively). Within the same patients, the model using all vs the most informative variables resulted in area under the curves (AUCs) of 69.2% and 68.3%, respectively. Multivariable analysis of those who were PRIAS eligible, yielded age and number of positive cores as independent predictors of HGPGU (P = 0.002 and P = 0.049, respectively; AUC 64.9%).CONCLUSIONS: The low accuracy (invariably <70%) for HGPGU prediction in both patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer and PRIAS eligibility indicates that these variables have poor predictive ability in contemporary patients. Despite HGPGU being a rare phenomenon, it may have life threatening implications and consequently alternatives such as biomarkers, genetic markers, or imaging modalities at re-biopsy are needed.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively assess the rate of high-grade primary Gleason upgrading (HGPGU) to primary Gleason pattern 4 or 5 in a contemporary cohort of patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer including those who fulfilled Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria, and to develop a tool for HGPGU prediction. HGPGU is a contraindication in most active surveillance (AS) and focal therapy protocols.PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 10 616 patients with localised prostate cancer were treated at a high-volume European tertiary care centre from 2010 to 2015 with radical prostatectomy. Analyses were restricted to 1 819 patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer (17.1%) with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of <10.0 ng/mL, cT1c-cT2a and Gleason score ≤6, and were repeated within 772 of the men (7.3%) who fulfilled the PRIAS criteria for AS (PSA level of ≤10 ng/mL, T1c-T2, Gleason score ≤6, PSA density (PSAD) of <0.2 ng/mL2, ≤2 positive cores). Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted, testing predictors of HGPGU. The final logistic regression model was based on the most informative variables.RESULTS: There was HGPGU in 88 (4.8%) patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer and in 32 (4.1%) of the subgroup who were PRIAS eligible. Multivariable analysis predicting HGPGU for the patients with D'Amico low-risk yielded three independent predictors: age, PSAD, and clinical tumour stage (P = 0.008, P = 0.005 and P = 0.021, respectively). Within the same patients, the model using all vs the most informative variables resulted in area under the curves (AUCs) of 69.2% and 68.3%, respectively. Multivariable analysis of those who were PRIAS eligible, yielded age and number of positive cores as independent predictors of HGPGU (P = 0.002 and P = 0.049, respectively; AUC 64.9%).CONCLUSIONS: The low accuracy (invariably <70%) for HGPGU prediction in both patients with D'Amico low-risk prostate cancer and PRIAS eligibility indicates that these variables have poor predictive ability in contemporary patients. Despite HGPGU being a rare phenomenon, it may have life threatening implications and consequently alternatives such as biomarkers, genetic markers, or imaging modalities at re-biopsy are needed.

KW - Adult

KW - Aged

KW - Biomarkers, Tumor

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Neoplasm Grading

KW - Predictive Value of Tests

KW - Prostatic Neoplasms

KW - Retrospective Studies

KW - Risk Assessment

KW - Watchful Waiting

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1111/bju.13570

DO - 10.1111/bju.13570

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 27367469

VL - 119

SP - 692

EP - 699

JO - BJU INT

JF - BJU INT

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 5

ER -