Abstract
Background
Gleason Score (GS) upgrading is generally considered a trigger for exit to definitive treatment during active surveillance (AS). Predicting the potential for GS upgrading would be of value in assessing AS eligibility.
Methods
We assessed the performance of biomarkers in pre-surgical specimens of expressed prostatic secretion (EPS) in this setting.
Results
Although EPS volume, total recovered RNA, and RNA expression biomarkers (TMPRSS2: ERG, PCA3, PSA) have been successful in both biopsy outcome prediction, and in the prediction of upstaging in active surveillance eligible patients, they were unable to predict upgrading in patients eligible for active surveillance under NCCN guidelines.
Conclusions
These biomarkers do not improve the prediction of upgrading over indications from standard clinical parameters.
Impact
Additional biomarkers will be needed in this area.
Keywords: Prostate Cancer, Gleason Score, Upgrading, Active Surveillance, Biomarkers
Introduction
Current practice during AS is to monitor low risk patients by repeating biopsies periodically. Patients with an initial biopsy GS of 6 are offered definitive treatment if a repeat biopsy during surveillance yields a GS ≥ 7. This suggests that the cancer may have progressed during the interval from the previous biopsy. Even so, a sizable proportion of GS 7 patients may have been misclassified GS 6 due to sampling error on low volume tumors (1, 2). For this reason, a non-invasive test that could detect this relatively subtle change in Gleason sum would be of value.
Results with post-DRE urine (3, 4), have consistently mirrored those with (EPS) (5, 6), suggesting that either specimen can be used in the detection and classification of prostate cancer. In previous work, improvements in AUC values of ≥ 0.1 (3-5) have been obtained for the prediction that cancer will be found at biopsy using these specimens. In this study, we sought to assess the performance of biomarkers in predicting Gleason upgrading in cohorts of men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). Our sample sizes were chosen for a statistical power of greater than 90% for an AUC improvement over baseline of ≥ 0.1.
Materials and Methods
EPS specimens from were obtained by milking the urethra after an attentive DRE before the patients underwent a Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP). Out of 646 men who consented under an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol for the collection and evaluation of biomarkers in EPS, 642 had complete clinical data, 224 met the 2012 NCCN criteria and 206 met the 2014 NCCN criteria for active surveillance based on their preoperative characteristics.
EPS specimen processing was as described previously (7). Standard clinico-pathologic data (age, Gleason sum, ethnicity, pre-surgical PSA, T stage, DRE and race,), direct measurements of EPS volume, total recovered RNA, and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction values for TMPRSS2:ERG, PCA3, and PSA RNAs were obtained.
Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) analysis of biomarker performance was carried out in an attempt to predict upgrading. Statistical power for AUC differences attributable to biomarkers was estimated with PASS software. Minimal models for each cohort emerged from stepwise logistic regression analysis on six clinical and ten laboratory variables (Table 1).
Table 1.
NCCN Cohorts* | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
2012 (N=224, Yes=99, No=125) | 2014 (N=206, Yes=94, No=112) | |||
Variable | UV | MV | UV | MV |
Pretreatment Gleason Score | ||||
Ethnicity | .0598 | .0460* | .0702 | .0395* |
Race | .2404 | .4513 | ||
Age | .1590 | .0080* | .0066* | |
DRE | .1026 | .1462 | ||
T Stage | .0860 | .0934 | ||
Prebiopsy Serum PSA | .0001** | <.0001** | .0002** | <.0001** |
PCA3 RNA | .6811 | .7230 | ||
PCA3 RNA/ Input RNA | .6914 | .7215 | ||
PCA3 RNA/PSA mRNA | .1946 | .1906 | ||
TMPRSS2:ERG | .5614 | .5773 | ||
TMPRSS2:ERG/Input RNA | .5888 | .5956 | ||
TMPRSS2:ERG/PSA mRNA | .5188 | .5385 | ||
PSA_mRNA | .2326 | .2563 | ||
PSA mRNA/Input RNA | .2356 | .2320 | ||
Expressed Volume Prostatic Fluid (μL) | .7702 | .5221 | ||
Total RNA in specimen (ng) | .5982 | .5917 |
Results
For the 2012 NCCN AS cohort EPS volume, Total RNA and RNA expression biomarkers did not significantly increase the AUC value beyond the 0.6969 AUC achieved by clinical variables for ethnicity and serum PSA in the prediction of upgrading post surgery (Figure 1A). For the 2014 NCCN AS cohort, these same biomarkers failed to significantly enhance the AUC value beyond the 0.7222 value achieved with age, ethnicity and serum PSA (Figure 1B). For the 2012 cohort with complete clinical and laboratory data and sample sizes of (125 not upgraded and 99 upgraded), the power to detect an increase in the AUC of .05 and .10 was approximately 40% and 90%, respectively. For the 2014 cohort with 206 patients with complete clinical and laboratory data, the sample sizes (112 not upgraded and 94 upgraded), the power to detect an increase in the AUC of .05 and .10 is also approximately 40% and 90%, respectively.
Discussion
For NCCN AS cohorts, the AUC values achieved with standard clinical markers remained unchanged by the inclusion of biomarkers that have been successful in the prediction of biopsy outcome and upstaging. Although an increase in AUC value of 0.05 due to these biomarkers cannot be excluded, it is unlikely that such an increase would warrant the clinical use of these biomarkers in counseling patients in this setting in spite of their success in other areas of treatment. Moreover, the general concordance between results obtained with EPS specimens and those obtained with urine samples obtained after an attentive DRE argues that the results obtained with EPS will mirror those obtained with post DRE urine. We conclude that in this cohort of men, models for predicting upgrading are dominated by the standard clinicopathologic parameters with no significant contribution from current biomarkers of RNA expression or prostate function tested in EPS.
Acknowledgments
Financial Support: NIH NCI Grants CA 102521 and CA 136055 to Steven Smith.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest Disclosure: The authors declare that they have no potential conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.Chism DB, Hanlon AL, Troncoso P, Al-Saleem T, Horwitz EM, Pollack A. The Gleason score shift: score four and seven years ago. International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics. 2003;56:1241–7. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(03)00268-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Corcoran NM, Hovens CM, Hong MK, Pedersen J, Casey RG, Connolly S, et al. Underestimation of Gleason score at prostate biopsy reflects sampling error in lower volume tumours. BJU Int. 2012;109:660–4. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10543.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Laxman B, Morris DS, Yu J, Siddiqui J, Cao J, Mehra R, et al. A first-generation multiplex biomarker analysis of urine for the early detection of prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 2008;68:645–9. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-3224. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Tomlins SA, Aubin SM, Siddiqui J, Lonigro RJ, Sefton-Miller L, Miick S, et al. Urine TMPRSS2:ERG fusion transcript stratifies prostate cancer risk in men with elevated serum PSA. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3:94ra72. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3001970. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Clark JP, Munson KW, Gu JW, Lamparska-Kupsik K, Chan KG, Yoshida JS, et al. Performance of a Single Assay for both Type III-Type VI TMPRSS2:ERG fusions in Non-Invasive Prediction of Prostate Biopsy Outcome. Clinical Chemistry. 2008;54:2007–17. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2008.108845. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Whelan C, Kawachi M, Smith DD, Linehan J, Babilonia G, Mejia R, et al. Expressed Prostatic Secretion Biomarkers Improve Stratification of National Comprehensive Cancer Network Active Surveillance Candidates: Performance of Secretion Capacity and TMPRSS2:ERG Models. The Journal of urology. 2013 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Clark JP, Munson KW, Gu JW, Lamparska-Kupsik K, Chan KG, Yoshida JS, et al. Performance of a single assay for both type III and type VI TMPRSS2:ERG fusions in noninvasive prediction of prostate biopsy outcome. Clin Chem. 2008;54:2007–17. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2008.108845. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]