Imaging-based prostate cancer screening among BRCA mutation carriers-results from the first round of screening

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly integrated within the prostate cancer (PCa) early detection pathway.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the existing evidence regarding screening pathways incorporating MRI with targeted biopsy and assess their diagnostic value compared with prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening with systematic biopsy strategies.

Data Sources

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane/Central, Scopus, and Web of Science (through May 2023).

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were eligible if they reported data on the diagnostic utility of prostate MRI in the setting of PCa screening.

Data Extraction

Number of screened individuals, biopsy indications, biopsies performed, clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 or higher, and insignificant (ISUP1) PCas detected were extracted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was csPCa detection rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical insignificant PCa detection rate, biopsy indication rates, and the positive predictive value for the detection of csPCa.

Data Synthesis

The generalized mixed-effect approach with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and random-effect models was used to compare the MRI-based and PSA-only screening strategies. Separate analyses were performed based on the timing of MRI (primary/sequential after a PSA test) and cutoff (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3 or ≥4) for biopsy indication.

Results

Data were synthesized from 80 114 men from 12 studies. Compared with standard PSA-based screening, the MRI pathway (sequential screening, PI-RADS score ≥3 cutoff for biopsy) was associated with higher odds of csPCa when tests results were positive (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.93-5.88; P ≤ .001), decreased odds of biopsies (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.36; P ≤ .001), and insignificant cancers detected (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49; P = .002) without significant differences in the detection of csPCa (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; P = .86). Implementing a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater threshold for biopsy selection was associated with a further reduction in the odds of detecting insignificant PCa (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-0.97; P = .048) and biopsies performed (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; P = .01) without differences in csPCa detection (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45; P = .22).

Conclusion and relevance

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that integrating MRI in PCa screening pathways is associated with a reduced number of unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of insignificant PCa while maintaining csPCa detection as compared with PSA-only screening.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Prostate Cancer Screening in Carriers of Pathogenic Germline Mutations: Interim Results from the Initial Screening Round of the Prostate Cancer Genetic Risk Evaluation and Screening Study

BACKGROUND

The risk of early-onset and clinically aggressive prostate cancer is elevated in carriers of certain rare pathogenic germline mutations. The utility of augmenting traditional prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening measures with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in this population is not yet known.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate MRI-based screening in comparison with traditional PSA-based screening among individuals at an elevated genetic risk for prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Male germline carriers of pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in any of 19 prostate cancer risk genes between the ages of 35 and 74 yr with no prior history of prostate cancer were recruited. Intervention Enrolled participants underwent screening with annual PSA, digital rectal examination (DRE), and triennial multiparametric MRI. Individuals with abnormal DRE, elevated age-adjusted PSA (>1.5 ng/ml for 35-49 yr, >2.0 ng/ml for 50-54 yr, and >3.0 ng/ml for 55-74 yr), or suspicious multiparametric MRI (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] ≥3 lesion) were offered prostate biopsy. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Endpoints were diagnosis of any and clinically significant prostate cancer, and alternative screening strategies were compared by a decision curve analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

To date, 101 males have completed the first round of screening. The greatest proportion of participants are carriers of BRCA2 (n = 44), BRCA1 (n = 35), and ATM (n = 7) variants. Twenty-one have undergone biopsy, resulting in the detection of nine cases of cancer (seven clinically significant). For the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, abnormal MRI (PI-RADS ≥3) demonstrated 100% sensitivity (7/7) with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100%, whereas PSA-based screening alone had 57% (4/7) sensitivity with an NPV of 73%. Of six screening strategies evaluated in the decision curve analysis, MRI-based screening alone achieved superior net benefit at all threshold probabilities compared with PSA screening-detecting one additional cancer case per 7.5 patients, while avoiding more unnecessary biopsies at the same threshold probability.

CONCLUSIONS

Disease prevalence is high among carriers of prostate cancer-associated pathogenic germline mutations. Early results suggest that MRI-based screening enhances early detection of clinically significant disease beyond PSA screening alone.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we present the interim results from the PROGRESS prostate cancer screening trial. We found that in certain germline carriers of prostate cancer risk mutations, magnetic resonance imaging-based screening enhances detection of prostate cancer while reducing biopsies triggered, in comparison with traditional prostate-specific antigen screening strategies.

Key learning on the promise and limitations of MRI in prostate cancer screening

MRI retains its ability to reduce the harm of prostate biopsies by decreasing biopsy rates and the detection of indolent cancers in population-based screening studies aiming to find clinically significant prostate cancers. Limitations of low positive predictive values and high reader variability in diagnostic performance require optimisations in patient selection, imaging protocols, interpretation standards, diagnostic thresholds, and biopsy methods. Improvements in diagnostic accuracy could come about through emerging technologies like risk calculators and polygenic risk scores to select men for MRI. Furthermore, artificial intelligence and workflow optimisations focused on streamlining the diagnostic pathway, quality control, and assurance measures will improve MRI variability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI significantly reduces harm in prostate cancer screening, lowering unnecessary biopsies and minimizing the overdiagnosis of indolent cancers. MRI maintains the effective detection of high-grade cancers, thus improving the overall benefit-to-harm ratio in population-based screenings with or without using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for patient selection. KEY POINTS: • The use of MRI enables the harm reduction benefits seen in individual early cancer detection to be extended to both risk-stratified and non-stratified prostate cancer screening populations. • MRI limitations include a low positive predictive value and imperfect reader variability, which require standardising interpretations, biopsy methods, and integration into a quality diagnostic pathway. • Current evidence is based on one-time point use of MRI in screening; MRI effectiveness in multiple rounds of screening is not well-documented.

Incorporating Genetic Risk Into Prostate Cancer Care: Implications for Early Detection and Precision Oncology

The availability and cost of germline and somatic genetic testing have dramatically improved over the past two decades, enabling precision medicine approaches in oncology, with significant implications for prostate cancer (PCa) care. Roughly 12% of individuals with advanced disease are carriers of rare pathogenic germline variants that predispose to particularly aggressive and earlier-onset disease. Several of these variants are already established as clinically actionable by modern precision oncology therapeutics, while others may come to aid the selection of active surveillance, definitive local therapies, and systemic therapies. Concurrently, the number of common variants (ie, incorporated into polygenic risk scores) associated with PCa risk has continued to grow, but with several important considerations both at the intersection of race and ancestry and for early detection of aggressive disease. Family history has historically been used as a proxy for this inherited genetic risk of PCa, but recently emerging evidence examining this relation has shifted our understanding of how best to leverage this tool in PCa care. This review seeks to clarify and contextualize the existing and emerging precision oncology paradigms that use inherited genetic risk in PCa care, for both early detection and localized disease management.

Usefulness of BRCA and ctDNA as Prostate Cancer Biomarkers: A Meta-Analysis

Prostate cancer represents the most common male urologic neoplasia. Tissue biopsies are the gold standard in oncology for diagnosing prostate cancer. We conducted a study to find the most reliable and noninvasive diagnostic tool. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of two biomarkers which we believe are the most interesting: BRCA (BRCA1 and 2) and ctDNA. Our systematic research yielded 248 articles. Forty-five duplicates were first excluded and, upon further examination, a further 203 articles were excluded on the basis of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, leaving 25 articles. A statistical analysis of the obtained data has been performed. With a collective calculation, BRCA1 was expressed in 2.74% of all cases from 24,212 patients examined and BRCA2 in 1.96% of cases from 20,480 patients. In a total calculation using ctDNA, it was observed that 89% of cases from 1198 patients exhibited high expression of circulating tumor DNA. To date, no ideal PCa biomarker has been found. Although BRCA1 and BRCA2 work well for breast and ovarian cancers, they do not seem to be reliable for prostate cancer. ctDNA seems to be a much better biomarker; however, there are few studies in this area. Further studies need to be performed.

Clinical performance of magnetic resonance imaging and biomarkers for prostate cancer diagnosis in men at high genetic risk

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate different scenarios for the management of early diagnosis of cancer (PCa) in men at high genetic risk, using recently developed blood and urinary molecular biomarkers in combination with clinical information alongside multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 322 patients with a high genetic risk (familial or personal history of cancers or a predisposing germline variant) were included in this study. The primary outcome was the detection rates of PCa (positive biopsy) or clinically significant PCa (biopsy with International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade >1). Clinical parameters included age, body mass index, ancestry, and germline mutational status, mpMRI, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), Prostate Health Index and urinary markers (Prostate Cancer Associated 3, SelectMdx™ and T2:ERG score) were assessed. Sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) for each marker at their recommended cut-off for clinical practice were calculated. Comparison between diagnoses accuracy of each procedure and scenario was computed using mutual information based and direct effect contribution using a supervised Bayesian network approach.

RESULTS

A mpMRI Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≥3 showed higher Se than mpMRI PI-RADS score ≥4 for detection of PCa (82% vs 61%) and for the detection of ISUP grade >1 lesions (96% vs 80%). mpMRI PI-RADS score ≥3 performed better than a PSA level of ≥3 ng/mL (Se 96%, Sp 53% vs Se 91%, Sp 8%) for detection of clinically significant PCa. In case of negative mpMRI results, the supervised Bayesian network approach showed that urinary markers (with the same accuracy for all) and PSAD of ≥0.10 ng/mL/mL were the most useful indicators of decision to biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that screening men at high genetic risk of PCa must be based on mpMRI without pre-screening based on a PSA level of >3 ng/mL, to avoid missing too many ISUP grade >1 tumours and to significantly reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies. However, urinary markers or a PSAD of ≥0.10 ng/mL/mL when mpMRI was negative increased the detection of ISUP grade >1 cancers. We suggest that a baseline mpMRI be discussed for men at high genetic risk from the age of 40 years.

Implementation of BRCA mutations testing in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples of different cancer types

BRCA1 and BRCA2 are onco-suppressor genes involved in the DNA repair mechanism. The presence of BRCA1/2 mutations confers a higher risk of developing several cancer types. To date, the FDA approved various PARP inhibitors to treat selected BRCA1/2 mutated oncologic patients. At first, PARP inhibitors were approved for patients with ovarian and breast cancers, and subsequently for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after the treatment with chemotherapy. The current guidelines for BRCA testing are very heterogeneous between the different types of tumors regarding the diagnostic algorithm and the type of sample to analyze, such as the blood for the germline mutations and the tumoral tissue for the somatic mutations. Few data have currently been described regarding the detection of BRCA1/2 somatic mutations in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. In this review, we propose an overview of the BRCA mutations in FFPE samples of several cancers, including breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. We summarize the types and the frequency of BRCA mutations, the guidelines approved for the test, the molecular assays used for the detection and the PARP inhibitors approved for each tumor type.

Genetic Aspects and Molecular Testing in Prostate Cancer: A Report from a Dutch Multidisciplinary Consensus Meeting

Background

Germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) is becoming more broadly accepted, but testing indications and clinical consequences for carriers in each disease stage are not yet well defined.

Objective

To determine the consensus of a Dutch multidisciplinary expert panel on the indication and application of germline and tumour genetic testing in PCa.

Design setting and participants

The panel consisted of 39 specialists involved in PCa management. We used a modified Delphi method consisting of two voting rounds and a virtual consensus meeting.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Consensus was reached if ≥75% of the panellists chose the same option. Appropriateness was assessed by the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

Results and limitations

Of the multiple-choice questions, 44% reached consensus. For men without PCa having a relevant family history (familial PCa/BRCA-related hereditary cancer), follow-up by prostate-specific antigen was considered appropriate. For patients with low-risk localised PCa and a family history of PCa, active surveillance was considered appropriate, except in case of the patient being a BRCA2 germline pathogenic variant carrier. Germline and tumour genetic testing should not be done for nonmetastatic hormone-sensitive PCa in the absence of a relevant family history of cancer. Tumour genetic testing was deemed most appropriate for the identification of actionable variants, with uncertainty for germline testing. For tumour genetic testing in metastatic castration-resistant PCa, consensus was not reached for the timing and panel composition. The principal limitations are as follows: (1) a number of topics discussed lack scientific evidence, and therefore the recommendations are partly opinion based, and (2) there was a small number of experts per discipline.

Conclusions

The outcomes of this Dutch consensus meeting may provide further guidance on genetic counselling and molecular testing related to PCa.

Patient summary

A group of Dutch specialists discussed the use of germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) patients, indication of these tests (which patients and when), and impact of these tests on the management and treatment of PCa.

Prostate cancer risk, screening and management in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations

Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumour suppressor genes are associated with prostate cancer risk; however, optimal screening protocols for individuals with these mutations have been a subject of debate. Several prospective studies of prostate cancer incidence and screening among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have indicated at least a twofold to fourfold increase in prostate cancer risk among carriers of BRCA2 mutations compared with the general population. Moreover, BRCA2 mutations are associated with more aggressive, high-grade disease characteristics at diagnosis, more aggressive clinical behaviour and greater prostate cancer-specific mortality. The risk for BRCA1 mutations seems to be attenuated compared with BRCA2. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement or prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone is an imperfect indicator of clinically significant prostate cancer; therefore, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers might benefit from refined risk stratification strategies. However, the long-term impact of prostate cancer screening is unknown, and the optimal management of BRCA1/2 carriers with prostate cancer has not been defined. Whether timely localized therapy can improve overall survival in the screened population is uncertain. Long-term results of prospective studies are awaited to confirm the optimal screening strategies and benefits of prostate cancer screening among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, and whether these approaches ultimately have a positive impact on survival and quality of life in these patients.

Translational Bioinformatics for Human Reproductive Biology Research: Examples, Opportunities and Challenges for a Future Reproductive Medicine

Since 1978, with the first IVF (in vitro fertilization) baby birth in Manchester (England), more than eight million IVF babies have been born throughout the world, and many new techniques and discoveries have emerged in reproductive medicine. To summarize the modern technology and progress in reproductive medicine, all scientific papers related to reproductive medicine, especially papers related to reproductive translational medicine, were fully searched, manually curated and reviewed. Results indicated whether male reproductive medicine or female reproductive medicine all have made significant progress, and their markers have experienced the progress from karyotype analysis to single-cell omics. However, due to the lack of comprehensive databases, especially databases collecting risk exposures, disease markers and models, prevention drugs and effective treatment methods, the application of the latest precision medicine technologies and methods in reproductive medicine is limited.

Detection of BRCA1, and BRCA2 Alterations in Matched Tumor Tissue and Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Patients with Prostate Cancer in a Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are approved for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer harboring deleterious or suspected deleterious BRCA1 and/or 2 mutations. Identifying patients with prostate cancer harboring these mutations may be challenging. Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) provides an avenue for an easier detection of these mutations. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the concordance of BRCA mutations in the tumor tissue and cfDNA in patients with metastatic prostate cancer in the real-world setting.

METHODS

Somatic genomic profiling results were obtained from a clinical cohort of patients at our institution who had at least two samples tested. One of the samples needed to be from either primary or metastatic tissue. Concordance was adjusted to not include mutation types that the cfDNA platforms were not designed to detect.

RESULTS

The presence or absence of mutations in the BRCA gene was assessed in a total of 589 samples, including 327 cfDNA samples, from 260 patients with metastatic prostate cancer. The median time between the first test and any subsequent test was 22.8 (0.0-232) months. BRCA mutation was present in the patient's original prostate tissue in 23 samples (3.9%) of patients. The adjusted concordance between prostate tumor tissue and cfDNA was 97.9% [95% CI, 95.3-99.1%]. The adjusted concordance between metastatic samples and cfDNA was 93.5% [95% CI, 86.4-97.3%]. Of the patients who had a BRCA mutation detected in their prostate tissue, there was a 70% probability of detecting a BRCA mutation in the patient's cfDNA as well. For patients who did not have a detectable BRCA mutation in their primary prostate tissue, the probability of detecting a subsequent one later in the disease course was less than 0.9%.

CONCLUSION

There is a high level of concordance between tissue and blood for BRCA mutations. Testing cfDNA can provide reliable information on BRCA mutational status and is a viable alternative to solid tissue sequencing when unavailable. The development of a new BRCA mutation later in the disease course is a rare event.

Gastric Cancer Risk and Pathogenesis in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Carriers

Carriers of a pathogenic germline variant (PV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 are at increased risk for a number of malignancies, including breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss emerging evidence that BRCA2 PV carriers, and likely also BRCA1 PV carriers, are also at increased risk for gastric cancer (GC), highlighting that GC may be part of the BRCA1/2 cancer risk spectrum. While the pathogenesis of GC among BRCA1/2 PV carriers remains unclear, increasing evidence reveals that GCs are often enriched with mutations in homologous recombination-associated genes such as BRCA1/2, and that GC prognosis and response to certain therapies can depend on BRCA1/2 expression. Given the strength of data published to date, a risk management strategy for GC among BRCA1/2 PV carriers is needed, and herein we also propose a potential strategy for GC risk management in this population. Moving forward, further study is clearly warranted to define the mechanistic relationship between BRCA1/2 PVs and development of GC as well as to determine how GC risk management should be factored into the clinical care of BRCA1/2 carriers.

Overview on population screening for carriers with germline BRCA mutation in China

Carriers with BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic variants are associated with a high risk of breast and ovarian cancers (also pancreatic and prostate cancers). While the spectrum on germline BRCA mutations among the Chinese population shows ethnic specificity, the identification of carriers with germline BRCA mutation before cancer onset is the most effective approach to protect them. This review focused on the current status of BRCA1/2 screening, the surveillance and prevention measures, and discussed the issues and potential impact of BRCA1/2 population screening in China. We conducted literature research on databases PubMed and Google Scholar, as well as Chinese databases CNKI and Wangfang Med Online database (up to 31 March 2022). Latest publications on germline BRCA1/2 prevalence, spectrum, genetic screening as well as carrier counseling, surveillance and prevention were captured where available. While overall 15,256 records were retrieved, 72 publications using germline BRCA1/2 testing were finally retained for further analyses. Germline BRCA1/2 mutations are common in Chinese patients with hereditary breast, ovarian, prostate and pancreatic cancers. Within previous studies, a unique BRCA mutation spectrum in China was revealed. Next-generation sequencing panel was considered as the most common method for BRCA1/2 screening. Regular surveillance and preventive surgeries were tailored to carriers with mutated-BRCA1/2. We recommend that all Chinese diagnosed with breast, ovarian, pancreatic or prostate cancers and also healthy family members, shall undergo BRCA1/2 gene test to provide risk assessment. Subsequently, timely preventive measures for mutation carriers are recommended after authentic genetic counseling.

The role of prophylactic prostatectomy as a primary prevention strategy in high-risk germline mutation carriers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Men with high-risk germline mutations are at significantly higher risk of developing and dying from prostate cancer. Current screening and treatment paradigms may lead to missed opportunities for cure. Herein we review the current literature on prevention, screening and treatment of these carriers and explore the potential role of prophylactic prostatectomy in primary prevention of prostate cancer mortality.

RECENT FINDINGS

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening has demonstrated marginal benefits in prostate cancer (PCa) survival and uncertainty remains on its true benefit among high-risk carriers. Recent results indicate that PCa in BRCA 2 carriers occurs at a higher incidence, younger age and progresses more rapidly compared with noncarriers. An intensified screening protocol of MRI and PSA in young carriers demonstrated how using PSA values alone may be insufficient. Current evidence indicates that high-risk carriers have worse survival outcomes after undergoing radical treatment for screening detected disease when compared with noncarriers.

SUMMARY

Prophylactic prostatectomy within the context of a clinical trial is a reasonable primary prevention option for discussion with high-risk carriers, especially BRCA2 carriers during the shared decision-making process. Limitations exist in the current strategies of early PSA screening followed by radical treatment in this group.

Novel germline mutations for active surveillance and imaging strategies in prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights the emerging role of genetics-lead medicine (GLM) in prostate cancer. We describe the benefits of GLM integration into prostate cancer screening, diagnosis and management. Imaging techniques enhancing prostate cancer detection are advancing concurrently, facilitating strategic active surveillance protocols for appropriately selected patients. We aim to improve clinician awareness of the role of GLM in current and future practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

We explore recent literature advancing the role of GLM in prostate cancer detection and management, particularly as this coexists with the development of imaging technology. Our current understanding of germline mutations implicated in familial prostate cancer development is summarized. We describe how these developments are being utilized to inform screening, surveillance and the development of novel therapies. We summarize current guidelines and explore factors inhibiting optimal implementation of recommendations in clinical practice.

SUMMARY

Integration and further development of genetics-lead medicine in the detection, surveillance and management of prostate cancer will improve clinical outcomes for men at risk of aggressive disease as a result of familial predispositions to prostate cancer. This review summarizes the pertinent developments in the field including improving clinician awareness to facilitate implantation of these strategies into current clinical practice.

Germline Mutations in Patients With Early-Onset Prostate Cancer

Objective

To investigate the inherited mutations and their association with clinical features and treatment response in young-onset prostate cancer patients.

Method

Targeted gene sequencing on 139 tumor susceptibility genes was conducted with a total of 24 patients diagnosed with PCa under the age of 63 years old. Meanwhile, the related clinical information of those patients is collected and analyzed.

Results

Sixty-two germline mutations in 45 genes were verified in 22 patients. BRCA2 (20.8%) and GJB2 (20.8%) were found to be the most frequently mutated, followed by CHEK2, BRCA1, PALB2, CDKN2A, HOXB13, PPM1D, and RECQL (8.3% of each, 2/24). Of note, 58.3% (14/24) patients carry germline mutations in DNA repair genes (DRGs). Four families with HRR (homologous recombination repair)-related gene mutations were described and analyzed in detail. Two patients with BRCA2 mutation responded well to the combined treatment of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy/chemotherapy.

Conclusion

Mutations in DRGs are more prevalent in early-onset PCa with advanced clinical stages, and these patients had shorter progression-free survival. ADT Combined with either radiotherapy or chemotherapy may be effective in treating PCa caused by HRR-related gene mutations.

An appraisal of genetic testing for prostate cancer susceptibility

Most criteria for genetic testing for prostate cancer susceptibility require a prior diagnosis of prostate cancer, in particular cases with metastatic disease are selected. Advances in the field are expected to improve outcomes through tailored treatments for men with advanced prostate cancer with germline pathogenic variants, although these are not currently offered in the curative setting. A better understanding of the value of genetic testing for prostate cancer susceptibility in screening, for early detection and prevention is necessary. We review and summarize the literature describing germline pathogenic variants in genes associated with increased prostate cancer risk and aggressivity. Important questions include: what is our ability to screen for and prevent prostate cancer in a man with a germline pathogenic variant and how does knowledge of a germline pathogenic variant influence treatment of men with nonmetastatic disease, with hormone-resistant disease and with metastatic disease? The frequency of germline pathogenic variants in prostate cancer is well described, according to personal and family history of cancer and by stage and grade of disease. The role of these genes in aggressive prostate cancer is also discussed. It is timely to consider whether or not genetic testing should be offered to all men with prostate cancer. The goals of testing are to facilitate screening for early cancers in unaffected high-risk men and to prevent advanced disease in men with cancer.

Clinical Management of Prostate Cancer in High-Risk Genetic Mutation Carriers

Simple Summary

Men with certain genetic differences are at much higher risks of developing metastatic and lethal prostate cancer. With the recent introduction of a new class of medications specifically targeted to these gene repair pathways (PARP inhibitors), it is critical to review the state of the literature surrounding the management of men with prostate cancer who have these genetic differences. We review the existing literature to address common clinical questions pertaining to this population. There is an urgent need for further research regarding clinical management in these scenarios as patients are increasingly seeking out genetic testing and consulting healthcare professionals for guidance.

Abstract

Background: Prostate cancer is a leading cause of death. Approximately one in eight men who are diagnosed with prostate cancer will die of it. Since there is a large difference in mortality between low- and high-risk prostate cancers, it is critical to identify individuals who are at high-risk for disease progression and death. Germline genetic differences are increasingly recognized as contributing to risk of lethal prostate cancer. The objective of this paper is to review prostate cancer management options for men with high-risk germline mutations. Methods: We performed a review of the literature to identify articles regarding management of prostate cancer in individuals with high-risk germline genetic mutations. Results: We identified numerous publications regarding the management of prostate cancer among high-risk germline carriers, but the overall quality of the evidence is low. Conclusions: We performed a review of the literature and compiled clinical considerations for the management of individuals with high-risk germline mutations when they develop prostate cancer. The quality of the evidence is low, and there is an immediate need for further research and the development of consensus guidelines to guide clinical practice for these individuals.

Genetics of prostate cancer and its utility in treatment and screening

Prostate cancer heritability is attributed to a combination of rare, moderate to highly penetrant genetic variants as well as commonly occurring variants conferring modest risks [single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)]. Some of the former type of variants (e.g., BRCA2 mutations) predispose particularly to aggressive prostate cancer and confer poorer prognoses compared to men who do not carry mutations. Molecularly targeted treatments such as PARP inhibitors have improved outcomes in men carrying somatic and/or germline DNA repair gene mutations. Ongoing clinical trials are exploring other molecular targeted approaches based on prostate cancer somatic alterations. Genome wide association studies have identified >250 loci that associate with prostate cancer risk. Multi-ancestry analyses have identified shared as well as population specific risk SNPs. Prostate cancer risk SNPs can be used to estimate a polygenic risk score (PRS) to determine an individual's genetic risk of prostate cancer. The odds ratio of prostate cancer development in men whose PRS lies in the top 1% of the risk profile ranges from 9 to 11. Ongoing studies are investigating the utility of a prostate cancer PRS to target population screening to those at highest risk. With the advent of personalized medicine and development of DNA sequencing technologies, access to clinical genetic testing is increasing, and oncology guidelines from bodies such as NCCN and ESMO have been updated to provide criteria for germline testing of "at risk" healthy men as well as those with prostate cancer. Both germline and somatic prostate cancer research have significantly evolved in the past decade and will lead to further development of precision medicine approaches to prostate cancer treatment as well as potentially developing precision population screening models.

A Case-Based Clinical Approach to the Investigation, Management and Screening of Families with BRCA2 Related Prostate Cancer

BRCA2 is the most commonly implicated DNA damage repair gene associated with inherited prostate cancer. BRCA2 deficient prostate cancer typically presents at a younger age, is more poorly differentiated, and is associated with worse survival outcomes than non-BRCA2 associated prostate cancer. Despite these unfavourable prognostic implications, poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy have been identified as potent targeted therapeutic agents towards BRCA1/2 deficient cancer cells. This review article explores the literature surrounding BRCA2-related prostate cancer through a familial clinical scenario. The investigation, diagnosis and management of BRCA2 deficient prostate cancer will be explored, alongside the implications of the identification of a germline pathogenic BRCA2 variant within a family, cascade screening and prostate cancer surveillance in unaffected male BRCA2 carriers. A greater understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of DNA damage repair gene deficient prostate cancer, coupled with new treatment paradigms and widened access to both somatic and germline genetic analysis for prostate cancer patients and their families will hopefully enable the robust implementation of high quality evidence-based clinical pathways for both the management and identification of BRCA2 deficient prostate cancer and improved screening, early detection and prevention strategies for individuals at increased genetic risk of prostate cancer.

[Risk-adapted prostate cancer screening-update 2021]

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in men in industrialized countries. There is no commonly accepted prostate cancer screening strategy. Based on the experience of various international screening studies, the German Prostate Cancer Early Detection Study Based on a Baseline PSA Value in Young Men (PROBASE) was established in 2014.

OBJECTIVE

Based on the positive results of retrospective cohort analyses, the PROBASE study is designed to demonstrate that a screening strategy based on risk stratification by a baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at age 45 or 50 years may be an alternative to population-based screening. PROBASE is presented in the context of other risk-adapted screening studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

There are basically several approaches to improve the population-based screening of PCa. Known risk factors for prostate cancer are age, a certain genetic predisposition (BRCA 1/2) and other germline mutations as well as individual somatic mutations.

RESULTS

A total of 23,301 participants were randomized to study arm A. Baseline PSA testing in study arm A categorized 89.18% of participants into the low-risk group, 9.32% into the intermediate-risk group, and 1.48% into the high-risk group. Thus, the risk assignment exactly matched the previously reported distribution.

DISCUSSION

Baseline PSA-dependent, risk-adapted PSA screening has the potential to reduce the high incidence of overdiagnosis and ultimately overtreatment of insignificant prostate cancers of population-based screening through extended testing intervals in the low-risk group. In parallel with PROBASE, several risk-adapted screening strategies are currently being tested worldwide; the evaluation of which is also awaited in several years.