The impact of a BRCA2 mutation on mortality from screen-detected prostate cancer

Investigation of Clinically Significant Molecular Aberrations in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Implications for Personalized Treatment, Prognosis and Genetic Testing

The data on tumor molecular profiling of European patients with prostate cancer is limited. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic and predictive values of gene alterations in unselected patients with prostate cancer. The presence of gene alterations was assessed in patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer using the ForeSENTIA^® Prostate panel (Medicover Genetics), targeting 36 clinically relevant genes and microsatellite instability testing. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of gene alterations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Overall, 196 patients with prostate cancer were evaluated (median age 72.2 years, metastatic disease in 141 (71.9%) patients). Gene alterations were identified in 120 (61%) patients, while alteration in HRR genes were identified in 34 (17.3%) patients. The most commonly mutated HRR genes were ATM (17, 8.7%), BRCA2 (9, 4.6%) and BRCA1 (4, 2%). The presence of HRR gene alterations was not associated with advanced stage (p = 0.21), age at diagnosis (p = 0.28), Gleason score (p = 0.17) or overall survival (HR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.41-1.26; p = 0.251). We identified clinically relevant somatic gene alterations in European patients with prostate cancer. These molecular alterations have prognostic significance and therapeutic implications and/or may trigger genetic testing in selected patients. In the era of precision medicine, prospective research on the predictive role of these alterations for innovative treatments or their combinations is warranted.

Frequency of Germline and Somatic BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations in Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In prostate cancer (PC), the presence of BRCA somatic and/or germline mutation provides prognostic and predictive information. Meta-analysis aims to estimate the frequency of BRCA mutations in patients with PC (PCp). In November 2022, we reviewed literature searching for all articles testing the proportion of BRCA mutations in PCp, without explicit enrichment for familiar risk. The frequency of germline and somatic BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations was described in three stage disease populations (any/metastatic/metastatic castration-resistant PC, mCRPC). Out of 2253 identified articles, 40 were eligible. Here, 0.73% and 1.20% of any stage PCp, 0.94% and 1.10% of metastatic PCp, and 1.21% and 1.10% of mCRPC patients carried germline and somatic BRCA1 mutation, respectively; 3.25% and 6.29% of any stage PCp, 4.51% and 10.26% of metastatic PCp, and 3.90% and 10.52% of mCRPC patients carried germline and somatic BRCA2 mutation, respectively; and 4.47% and 7.18% of any stage PCp, 5.84% and 10.94% of metastatic PCp, and 5.26% and 11.26% of mCRPC patients carried germline and somatic BRCA1/2 mutation, respectively. Somatic mutations are more common than germline and BRCA2 are more common than BRCA1 mutations; the frequency of mutations is higher in the metastatic setting. Despite that BRCA testing in PC is now standard in clinical practice, several open questions remain.

Prevalence of Germline BRCA1/2 Variants in Ashkenazi and Non-Ashkenazi Prostate Cancer Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

International guidelines recommend testing BRCA2 in men with prostate cancer, due to the presence of a strong association with this gene. Some ethnicities present disparities in genetic distribution for the relation with specific founder variants. Ashkenazi Jewish people are, importantly, at high risk of breast cancer for their inherited cluster with germline BRCA1/2 variants. However, in Ashkenazi men with prostate cancer, the prevalence of BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 is not well defined. We assessed the frequency of these variants in Ashkenazi vs. non-Ashkenazi men with prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: In accord with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we revised all germline BRCA variants reported in MEDLINE from 1996 to 2021 in Ashkenazi and non-Ashkenazi men with prostate cancer. Results: Thirty-five original studies were selected for the analysis. Among populations from Israel and North America, Ashkenazi Jewish men presented higher prevalence of BRCA1 variants [0.9% (0.4-1.5) vs. 0.5% (0.2-1.1), p = 0.09] and a lower prevalence of BRCA2 variants [1.5% (1.1-2.0) vs. 3.5% (1.7-5.9), p = 0.08] in comparison to the non-Ashkenazi population. Conclusions: Since germline BRCA1 variants are more prevalent and BRCA2 variants are less prevalent in PCa patients of Ashkenazi Jewish ethnicity in comparison to non-Ashkenazi patients, prostate cancer genetic screening in Ashkenazi men should not be restricted to the BRCA2 gene.

Prognostic Role of DNA Damage Response Genes Mutations and their Association With the Sensitivity of Olaparib in Prostate Cancer Patients

Objective

Evidence shows that gene mutation is a significant proportion of genetic factors associated with prostate cancer. The DNA damage response (DDR) is a signal cascade network that aims to maintain genomic integrity in cells. This comprehensive study was performed to determine the link between different DNA damage response gene mutations and prostate cancer.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Papers published up to February 1, 2022 were retrieved. The DDR gene mutations associated with prostate cancer were identified by referring to relevant research and review articles. Data of prostate cancer patients from multiple PCa cohorts were obtained from cBioPortal. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated using both fixed-effects models (FEMs) and random-effects models (REMs).

Results

Seventy-four studies were included in this research, and the frequency of 13 DDR genes was examined. Through the analysis of 33 articles that focused on the risk estimates of DDR genes between normal people and PCa patients, DDR genes were found to be more common in prostate cancer patients (OR = 3.6293 95% CI [2.4992; 5.2705]). Also, patients in the mutated group had a worse OS and DFS outcome than those in the unmutated group (P < .05). Of the 13 DDR genes, the frequency of 9 DDR genes in prostate cancer was less than 1%, and despite differences in race, BRCA2 was the potential gene with the highest frequency (REM Frequency = .0400, 95% CI .0324 - .0541). The findings suggest that mutations in genes such as ATR, BLM, and MLH1 in PCa patients may increase the sensitivity of Olaparib, a PARP inhibitor.

Conclusion

These results demonstrate that mutation in any DDR pathway results in a poor prognosis for PCa patients. Furthermore, mutations in ATR, BLM, and MLH1 or the expression of POLR2L, PMS1, FANCE, and other genes significantly influence Olaparib sensitivity, which may be underlying therapeutic targets in the future.

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.

Germline testing and genetic counselling in prostate cancer

Genetic testing for prostate cancer is rapidly growing and is increasingly being driven by precision medicine. Rates of germline pathogenic variants have been reported in up to 15% of men with prostate cancer, particularly in metastatic disease, and results of genetic testing could uncover options for precision therapy along with a spectrum of hereditary cancer-predisposition syndromes with unique clinical features that have complex management options. Thus, the pre-test discussion, whether delivered by genetic counsellors or by health-care professionals in hybrid models, involves information on hereditary cancer risk, extent of gene testing, purpose of testing, medical history and family history, potential types of results, additional cancer risks that might be uncovered, genetically based management and effect on families. Understanding precision medicine, personalized cancer risk management and syndrome-related cancer risk management is important in order to develop collaborative strategies with genetic counselling for optimal care of patients and their families.

In this Review, Russo and Giri describe and discuss germline testing criteria, genetic testing strategies, genetically informed screening, precision management, delivery of genetic counselling or alternative genetic services and special considerations for men with prostate cancer.

Germline (hereditary) genetic testing is rising in importance for treatment, screening and risk assessment of prostate cancer.

Multiple hereditary cancer syndromes might be associated with prostate cancer, might confer risk of other cancerous and non-cancerous conditions, and can have hereditary cancer implications for family members. The rates of these syndromes can vary based upon the attributed genetic mutations.

Multiple aspects of germline testing should be discussed in the pre-test setting for men to make an informed decision, including the purpose of genetic testing, the benefits and risks of testing, hereditary cancer risk, identification of additional cancer risks, familial implications and the state of genetic discrimination protections.

Genetic evaluation can be conducted by genetic counsellors or a hybrid model can be employed, in which health-care providers deliver pre-test informed consent for testing, order testing and then determine referral to genetic counselling for appropriate patients.

Precision medicine is increasingly driving decisions for germline testing. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors and various other agents now in clinical trials have clinical activity in patients with certain hereditary cancer gene mutations, such as in DNA repair genes.

Patients’ experiences with germline testing can be variable; taking the patient’s current experience into account, considering referral to genetic counselling when needed and offering germline testing for eligible men at repeated intervals if initially declined are important.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants and prostate cancer risk: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants (PVs) are associated with prostate cancer (PCa) risk, but a wide range of relative risks (RRs) has been reported.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library in June 2021 for studies that estimated PCa RRs for male BRCA1/2 carriers, with no time or language restrictions. The literature search identified 27 studies (BRCA1: n = 20, BRCA2: n = 21).

RESULTS

The heterogeneity between the published estimates was high (BRCA1: I2 = 30%, BRCA2: I2 = 83%); this could partly be explained by selection for age, family history or aggressive disease, and study-level differences in ethnicity composition, use of historical controls, and location of PVs within BRCA2. The pooled RRs were 2.08 (95% CI 1.38-3.12) for Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA2 carriers, 4.35 (95% CI 3.50-5.41) for non-Ashkenazi European ancestry BRCA2 carriers, and 1.18 (95% CI 0.95-1.47) for BRCA1 carriers. At ages <65 years, the RRs were 7.14 (95% CI 5.33-9.56) for non-Ashkenazi European ancestry BRCA2 and 1.78 (95% CI 1.09-2.91) for BRCA1 carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

These PCa risk estimates will assist in guiding clinical management. The study-level subgroup analyses indicate that risks may be modified by age and ethnicity, and for BRCA2 carriers by PV location within the gene, which may guide future risk-estimation studies.

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.

Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate as a Cause of Prostate Cancer Metastasis: A Molecular Portrait

Simple Summary

Most men with prostate cancer will live as long as those who do not have prostate cancer. However, some men will die early of their disease due to a particular type of prostate cancer associated with recurrence and metastasis: intraductal carcinoma of the prostate. In this review, we discuss the associations between intraductal carcinoma of the prostate and metastasis, and the contemporary knowledge about the molecular alterations of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate.

Abstract

Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is one of the most aggressive types of prostate cancer (PCa). IDC-P is identified in approximately 20% of PCa patients and is associated with recurrence, metastasis, and PCa-specific death. The main feature of this histological variant is the colonization of benign glands by PCa cells. Although IDC-P is a well-recognized independent parameter for metastasis, mechanisms by which IDC-P cells can spread and colonize other tissues are not fully known. In this review, we discuss the molecular portraits of IDC-P determined by immunohistochemistry and genomic approaches and highlight the areas in which more research is needed.

PARP Inhibition in Prostate Cancer With Homologous Recombination Repair Alterations

PURPOSE

With the broad use of next-generation sequencing assays, it has become clear that mutations in DNA repair genes are more commonly found than previously reported. In advanced prostate cancer patients with BRCA1/2 or ATM mutations, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition (PARPi) causes an increased overall survival advantage compared with patients without these mutations. This review explores the advantages and limitations of PARPi treatment and its use beyond BRCA1/2-altered tumors. Furthermore, it discusses the benefits of current biomarkers and what role functional biomarkers and organoids may play in addressing the involvement of homologous recombination repair mutations in tumor development and progression.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE, National Library of Medicine, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify studies published between January 1, 2016, and August 31, 2021. The search strategy incorporated terms for PARPi, BRCA, DNA damage, homologous recombination, organoids, patient-derived organoids, biomarker AND prostate cancer, breast cancer, ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 261 records remained after duplicate removal, 69 of which were included in the qualitative synthesis.

CONCLUSION

To improve the outcome of targeted therapy and increase sensitivity of tumor detection, patients should be repeatedly screened for DNA repair gene alterations and biomarkers. Future clinical studies should explore the use of PARPi beyond BRCA1/2 mutations and focus on finding new synthetically lethal interactions.

This review explores PARPi and its use for more than just BRCA1/2 altered tumors

Updates in Prostate Cancer Research and Screening in Men at Genetically Higher Risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate cancer (PrCa) is the most common cancer in men in the western world and is a major source of morbidity and mortality. Currently, general population PrCa screening is not recommended due to the limitations of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. As such, there is increasing interest in identifying and screening higher-risk groups. The only established risk factors for PrCa are age, ethnicity, and having a family history of PrCa. A significant proportion of PrCa cases are caused by genetic factors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several rare germline variants have been identified that moderately increase risk of PrCa, and targeting screening to these men is proving useful at detecting clinically significant disease. The use of a "polygenic risk score" (PRS) that can calculate a man's personalized risk based on a number of lower-risk, but common genetic variants is the subject of ongoing research. Research efforts are currently focusing on the utility of screening in specific at-risk populations based on ethnicity, such as men of Black Afro-Caribbean descent. Whilst most screening studies have focused on use of PSA testing, the incorporation of additional molecular and genomic biomarkers alongside increasingly sophisticated imaging modalities is being designed to further refine and individualise both the screening and diagnostic pathway. Approximately 10% of men with advanced PrCa have a germline genetic predisposition leading to the opportunity for novel, targeted precision treatments.

SUMMARY

The mainstreaming of genomics into the PrCa screening, diagnostic and treatment pathway will soon become standard practice and this review summarises current knowledge on genetic predisposition to PrCa and screening studies that are using genomics within their algorithms to target screening to higher-risk groups of men. Finally, we evaluate the importance of germline genetics beyond screening and diagnostics, and its role in the identification of lethal PrCa and in the selection of targeted treatments for advanced disease.

Next-generation sequencing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in Moroccan prostate cancer patients with positive family history

Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer in Morocco. Although sporadic forms account for a large proportion of patients, familial forms of prostate cancer are observed in 20% of cases and about 5% are due to hereditary transmission. Indeed, germline mutations in BRCA1/2 genes have been associated with prostate cancer risk. However, the spectrum of these mutations was not investigated in Moroccan Prostate cancer patients. Thereby, the aim of this study was to characterize and to estimate the prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 mutations and large rearrangements in Moroccan patients with familial prostate cancer. The entire coding regions and intron/exon boundaries of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have been analyzed by next generation sequencing (NGS) in a total of 30 familial prostate cancer patients. Three pathogenic mutations were detected in four unrelated patients (13.3%). One BRCA1 mutation (c.1953_1956delGAAA) and two BRCA2 mutations (c.7234_7235insG and BRCA2ΔE12). In addition, sixty-three distinct polymorphisms and unclassified variants have been found. Early identification of germline BRCA1/2 mutations may be relevant for the management of Moroccan prostate cancer patients.

Basic Science and Molecular Genetics of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness

Androgen receptor function, tumor cell plasticity, loss of tumor suppressors, and defects in DNA repair genes affect aggressive features of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer development, progression, and aggressive behavior are often attributable to function of the androgen receptor. Tumor cell plasticity, neuroendocrine features, and loss of tumor suppressors lend aggressive behavior to prostate cancer cells. DNA repair defects have ramifications for prostate cancer cell behavior.

Clinical Multigene Testing for Prostate Cancer

Germline genetic testing for prostate cancer (PC) is increasingly important as the clinical utility of germline variants in this patient population is understood better. To better characterize the clinical landscape of germline testing in PC, published clinical cohorts of PC who underwent clinical germline genetic analysis at point of care are reviewed. Limitations and heterogeneity of these cohorts are highlighted and pathogenic results with established or potential clinical utility in PC noted. The need for additional germline genetic studies is underscored, because the number of PC patients studied lags greatly behind the high prevalence of the disease.

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.

Prevalence and clinicopathological/molecular characteristics of mismatch repair protein-deficient tumours among surgically treated patients with prostate cancer in a Japanese hospital-based population

BACKGROUND

The prevalence and molecular characteristics of deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer in the Japanese population have scarcely been investigated.

METHODS

Immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2) was performed in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections prepared from resected primary prostate cancers in patients who underwent prostatectomy at our institution between January 2001 and May 2016. Genetic and/or epigenetic alterations of mismatch repair genes were investigated in patients with any loss of mismatch repair protein expression in the tumour.

RESULTS

Of the 337 patients, four (1.2%) showed loss of mismatch repair protein expression on immunohistochemistry. All four patients showed loss of both MSH2 and MSH6 protein expression. Genetic testing was performed in two of the four patients, demonstrating no pathogenic germline alterations were present. In each of these two patients, at least one somatic alteration inactivating MSH2 without MSH2 hypermethylation was identified, leading to the diagnosis of supposed 'Lynch-like syndrome'. Patients with deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer were at a significantly higher stage (pT2pN0 vs. pT3-4pN0/pTanypN1, P = 0.02) and had a greater Gleason score (<8 vs. ≥8, P < 0.01) than those with proficient mismatch repair prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer in the Japanese hospital-based prostatectomized population was extremely low. To improve screening efficacy for deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer, screening candidates can be limited to patients with locally advanced, node-positive and/or Gleason score of 8 or greater prostate cancer. Universal tumour screening for Lynch syndrome seems ineffective in patients with prostate cancer.

Identification of Germline Genetic Variants that Increase Prostate Cancer Risk and Influence Development of Aggressive Disease

Prostate cancer (PrCa) is a heterogeneous disease, which presents in individual patients across a diverse phenotypic spectrum ranging from indolent to fatal forms. No robust biomarkers are currently available to enable routine screening for PrCa or to distinguish clinically significant forms, therefore late stage identification of advanced disease and overdiagnosis plus overtreatment of insignificant disease both remain areas of concern in healthcare provision. PrCa has a substantial heritable component, and technological advances since the completion of the Human Genome Project have facilitated improved identification of inherited genetic factors influencing susceptibility to development of the disease within families and populations. These genetic markers hold promise to enable improved understanding of the biological mechanisms underpinning PrCa development, facilitate genetically informed PrCa screening programmes and guide appropriate treatment provision. However, insight remains largely lacking regarding many aspects of their manifestation; especially in relation to genes associated with aggressive phenotypes, risk factors in non-European populations and appropriate approaches to enable accurate stratification of higher and lower risk individuals. This review discusses the methodology used in the elucidation of genetic loci, genes and individual causal variants responsible for modulating PrCa susceptibility; the current state of understanding of the allelic spectrum contributing to PrCa risk; and prospective future translational applications of these discoveries in the developing eras of genomics and personalised medicine.

Emerging Subtypes and New Treatments for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Genomic characterization of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has been remodeling the treatment landscape of this disease in the past decade. The emergence of molecularly defined subsets of mCRPC is altering the treatment paradigm from therapeutics with nonspecific activity across the spectrum, including androgen receptor (AR)-directed treatments, docetaxel, and cabazitaxel, to targeted approaches directed at molecular subsets of disease. The meaningful benefit of PARP inhibitors in mCRPC carrying mutations in DNA repair genes demonstrated in a phase III trial epitomizes this transition in the treatment paradigm of mCRPC and brings new challenges related to how to sequence and integrate the targeted therapies on top of the treatments with broad activity in all mCRPC. To enable and sustain the advance of precision oncology in the management of mCRPC, genomic characterization is required, including somatic and germline testing, for all patients with the ultimate goal of longitudinal molecular profiling guiding treatment decisions and sequential treatments of this lethal disease. This article reviews the emerging molecular subtypes of mCRPC that are driving the evolution of mCRPC treatment.

Bad neighbours: hypoxia and genomic instability in prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a clinically heterogeneous disease and has poor patient outcome when tumours progress to castration-resistant and metastatic states. Understanding the mechanistic basis for transition to late stage aggressive disease is vital for both assigning patient risk status in the localised setting and also identifying novel treatment strategies to prevent progression. Subregions of intratumoral hypoxia are found in all solid tumours and are associated with many biologic drivers of tumour progression. Crucially, more recent findings show the co-presence of hypoxia and genomic instability can confer a uniquely adverse prognosis in localised PCa patients. In-depth informatic and functional studies suggests a role for hypoxia in co-operating with oncogenic drivers (e.g. loss of PTEN) and suppressing DNA repair capacity to alter clonal evolution due to an aggressive mutator phenotype. More specifically, hypoxic suppression of homologous recombination represents a “contextual lethal“ vulnerability in hypoxic prostate tumours which could extend the application of existing DNA repair targeting agents such as poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors. Further investigation is now required to assess this relationship on the background of existing genomic alterations relevant to PCa, and also characterise the role of hypoxia in driving early metastatic spread. On this basis, PCa patients with hypoxic tumours can be better stratified into risk categories and treated with appropriate therapies to prevent progression.

Implementation of Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019

PURPOSE

Germline testing (GT) is a central feature of prostate cancer (PCA) treatment, management, and hereditary cancer assessment. Critical needs include optimized multigene testing strategies that incorporate evolving genetic data, consistency in GT indications and management, and alternate genetic evaluation models that address the rising demand for genetic services.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary consensus conference that included experts, stakeholders, and national organization leaders was convened in response to current practice challenges and to develop a genetic implementation framework. Evidence review informed questions using the modified Delphi model. The final framework included criteria with strong (> 75%) agreement (Recommend) or moderate (50% to 74%) agreement (Consider).

RESULTS

Large germline panels and somatic testing were recommended for metastatic PCA. Reflex testing-initial testing of priority genes followed by expanded testing-was suggested for multiple scenarios. Metastatic disease or family history suggestive of hereditary PCA was recommended for GT. Additional family history and pathologic criteria garnered moderate consensus. Priority genes to test for metastatic disease treatment included BRCA2, BRCA1, and mismatch repair genes, with broader testing, such as ATM, for clinical trial eligibility. BRCA2 was recommended for active surveillance discussions. Screening starting at age 40 years or 10 years before the youngest PCA diagnosis in a family was recommended for BRCA2 carriers, with consideration in HOXB13, BRCA1, ATM, and mismatch repair carriers. Collaborative (point-of-care) evaluation models between health care and genetic providers was endorsed to address the genetic counseling shortage. The genetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade testing, and technology-based approaches.

CONCLUSION

This multidisciplinary, consensus-driven PCA genetic implementation framework provides novel guidance to clinicians and patients tailored to the precision era. Multiple research, education, and policy needs remain of importance.

Prognostic significance of p16 expression in high-grade prostate adenocarcinoma

Management of advanced hormone-naïve prostate cancer (HNPC) is a critical public health issue. Useful prognostic markers are thus needed to select patients who will benefit from recently introduced upfront therapies. p16 expression is an adverse prognostic marker in prostate cancer. The present study aimed to determine whether p16 expression would serve as an adverse prognostic marker in advanced HNPC. A total of 79 patients diagnosed by needle biopsy with adenocarcinoma Gleason score ≥8 between 2010 and 2013 at Aichi Medical University were included in this study. The median patient age was 73 (range 52-87) years. The median follow-up was 62 months (range 2-98). Fourteen patients had p16-positive samples. Fifteen patients died from prostate cancer, 10 of whom were in the p16-positive group. p16 positivity was associated with clinical T stage (P < 0.001), presence of IDC-P (P < 0.001), distant metastasis (P < 0.001) and lymph node metastasis (P < 0.001). These results indicate that p16 expression is associated with adverse prognostic factor of prostate cancer and suggest that p16 expression may provide useful information for treatment planning and identifying suitable candidates for upfront chemotherapy or androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy.

Hereditary Predisposition to Prostate Cancer: From Genetics to Clinical Implications

Prostate cancer (PrCa) ranks among the top five cancers for both incidence and mortality worldwide. A significant proportion of PrCa susceptibility has been attributed to inherited predisposition, with 10-20% of cases expected to occur in a hereditary/familial context. Advances in DNA sequencing technologies have uncovered several moderate- to high-penetrance PrCa susceptibility genes, most of which have previously been related to known hereditary cancer syndromes, namely the hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2) and Lynch syndrome (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) genes. Additional candidate genes have also been suggested, but further evidence is needed to include them in routine genetic testing. Recommendations based on clinical features, family history, and ethnicity have been established for more cost-efficient genetic testing of patients and families who may be at an increased risk of developing PrCa. The identification of alterations in PrCa predisposing genes may help to inform screening strategies, as well as treatment options, in the metastatic setting. This review provides an overview of the genetic basis underlying hereditary predisposition to PrCa, the current genetic screening recommendations, and the implications for clinical management of the disease.

Risk of Prostate Cancer Associated With Familial and Hereditary Cancer Syndromes

PURPOSE

Recently developed clinical guidelines suggest that men in families with specific cancer syndromes, such as hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), consider genetic testing, especially in the setting of aggressive disease. However, although a family history (FH) of the same disease among close relatives is an established risk factor for prostate cancer (PC), a direct comparison of PC risk for men with each syndrome in a single population is needed.

METHODS

The Utah Population Database was used to identify 619,630 men, age ≥ 40 years, who were members of a pedigree that included at least 3 consecutive generations. Each man was evaluated for FH of hereditary PC (HPC), HBOC, and Lynch syndrome (LS) and for his own PC status. PC occurrences (N = 36,360) were classified into one or more subtypes: early onset (EO), lethal, and/or clinically significant. Relative risks (RRs) associated with each subtype, adjusted for important covariables, were calculated in STATA using a modified Poisson regression with robust error variances to obtain corresponding RR CIs for each FH definition.

RESULTS

An FH of HPC conveyed the greatest relative risk for all PC subtypes combined (RR, 2.30; 95% CI, 2.22 to 2.40), followed by HBOC and LS (both with 1 < RR < 2 and statistically significant). The strongest risks associated with FH were observed for EO disease in all pedigree types, consistent with the contribution of genetic factors to disease occurrence.

CONCLUSION

In this large, population-based, family database, the risk of PC varied by cancer FH and was most strongly associated with EO disease. These results are critically valuable in understanding and targeting high-risk populations that would benefit from genetic screening and enhanced surveillance.

BRCA2 gene mutation and prostate cancer risk. Comprehensive review and update

The second most common type of tumor worldwide is prostate cancer (PCa). Certain genetic factors contribute to a risk of developing PCa of as much as 40%. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have linked with an increased risk for breast, ovarian, and PCa. However, BRCA2 is the most common gene found altered in early-onset of PCa in males younger than 65. BRCA2 mutation has a higher chance of developing an advanced stage of the disease, resulting in short survival time. This review aimed to describe the genetic changes in BRCA2 that contribute to the risk of PCa, to define its role in the early diagnosis in a man with a strong family history, and to outline the purpose of genetic testing and counseling. Also, the review summarizes the impact of BRCA2 gene mutation in localized PCa, and the treatment strategies have used for PCa patients with a BRCA2 modification.

Prostate Cancer Risks for Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have been associated with prostate cancer (PCa) risk but a wide range of risk estimates have been reported that are based on retrospective studies.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate relative and absolute PCa risks associated with BRCA1/2 mutations and to assess risk modification by age, family history, and mutation location.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a prospective cohort study of male BRCA1 (n = 376) and BRCA2 carriers (n = 447) identified in clinical genetics centres in the UK and Ireland (median follow-up 5.9 and 5.3 yr, respectively).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Standardised incidence/mortality ratios (SIRs/SMRs) relative to population incidences or mortality rates, absolute risks, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using cohort and survival analysis methods.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Sixteen BRCA1 and 26 BRCA2 carriers were diagnosed with PCa during follow-up. BRCA2 carriers had an SIR of 4.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.99-6.61) and absolute PCa risk of 27% (95% CI 17-41%) and 60% (95% CI 43-78%) by ages 75 and 85 yr, respectively. For BRCA1 carriers, the overall SIR was 2.35 (95% CI 1.43-3.88); the corresponding SIR at age <65 yr was 3.57 (95% CI 1.68-7.58). However, the BRCA1 SIR varied between 0.74 and 2.83 in sensitivity analyses to assess potential screening effects. PCa risk for BRCA2 carriers increased with family history (HR per affected relative 1.68, 95% CI 0.99-2.85). BRCA2 mutations in the region bounded by positions c.2831 and c.6401 were associated with an SIR of 2.46 (95% CI 1.07-5.64) compared to population incidences, corresponding to lower PCa risk (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.96) than for mutations outside the region. BRCA2 carriers had a stronger association with Gleason score ≥7 (SIR 5.07, 95% CI 3.20-8.02) than Gleason score ≤6 PCa (SIR 3.03, 95% CI 1.24-7.44), and a higher risk of death from PCa (SMR 3.85, 95% CI 1.44-10.3). Limitations include potential screening effects for these known mutation carriers; however, the BRCA2 results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The results substantiate PCa risk patterns indicated by retrospective analyses for BRCA2 carriers, including further evidence of association with aggressive PCa, and give some support for a weaker association in BRCA1 carriers.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study we followed unaffected men known to carry mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes to investigate whether they are at higher risk of developing prostate cancer compared to the general population. We found that carriers of BRCA2 mutations have a high risk of developing prostate cancer, particularly more aggressive prostate cancer, and that this risk varies by family history of prostate cancer and the location of the mutation within the gene.

Contribution of Inherited DNA-Repair Gene Mutations to Hormone-Sensitive and Castrate-Resistant Metastatic Prostate Cancer and Implications for Clinical Outcome

PURPOSE

To compare the prevalence of germline mutations in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and assess the impact of mutations on progression to castration resistance and overall survival.

METHODS

Targeted sequencing of germline DNA from 704 men (221 at the time of mHSPC and 483 at the time of mCRPC) enrolled in two advanced prostate cancer registries at Mayo Clinic between 2003 and 2013 was performed for 21 predisposition genes. Frequencies of pathogenic mutations were compared in patients and reference controls to identify genes enriched in metastatic prostate cancer. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify predictors of progression to mCRPC and overall survival.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight germline mutations in 12 genes were identified in 66 men (9.4%). Mutations in ATM, BRCA2, CHEK2, FANCM, and TP53 were significantly enriched (odds ratio greater than 2.0) in the metastatic cohorts compared with reference controls. The frequency of germline mutations was similar for patients with mHSPC and mCRPC (11.8% v 8.3%; P = .16). The median time to progression from mHSPC to mCRPC was 23.1 and 32.5 months for patients with and without mutations, respectively (P = .96). Although older age at diagnosis, Gleason score greater than 7, elevated alkaline phosphatase level, and high volume of disease were associated with shorter duration of progression to mCRPC and poor overall survival, mutation status was not (progression to mCRPC hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.09; P = .17; overall survival hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.34; P = .98).

CONCLUSION

Similarly elevated rates of germline predisposition gene mutations in mHSPC and mCRPC suggest that germline genetic testing may help to guide medical management for all patients with advanced metastatic prostate cancer. Mutation status was not associated with shorter progression to mCRPC or poor overall survival.

A systematic review of the prevalence of DNA damage response gene mutations in prostate cancer

Several ongoing international prostate cancer (PC) clinical trials are exploring therapies that target the DNA damage response (DDR) pathway. This systematic review summarizes the prevalence of DDR mutation carriers in the unselected (general) PC and familial PC populations. A total of 11 electronic databases, 10 conference proceedings, and grey literature sources were searched from their inception to December 2017. Studies reporting the prevalence of somatic and/or germline DDR mutations were summarized. Metastatic PC (mPC), castration‑resistant PC (CRPC) and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) subgroups were included. A total of 11,648 records were retrieved, and 80 studies (103 records) across all PC populations were included; 59 records were of unselected PC and 13 records of familial PC. Most data were available for DDR panels (n=12 studies), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM; n=13), breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA)1 (n=14) and BRCA2 (n=20). ATM, BRCA2 and partner and localizer of BRCA2 (PALB2) had the highest mutation rates (≥4%). Median prevalence rates for DDR germline mutations were 18.6% in PC (range, 17.2‑19%; three studies, n=1,712), 11.6% in mPC (range, 11.4‑11.8%; two studies, n=1,261) and 8.3% in mCRPC (range, 7.5‑9.1%; two studies, n=738). Median prevalence rates for DDR somatic mutations were 10.7% in PC (range, 4.9‑22%; three studies, n=680), 13.2% in mPC (range, 10‑16.4%; two studies, n=105) and not reported (NR) in mCRPC. The prevalence of DDR germline and/or somatic mutations was 27% in PC (one study, n=221), 22.67% in mCRPC (one study, n=150) and NR in mPC. In familial PC, median mutation prevalence was 12.1% (range, 7.3‑16.9%) for germline DDR (two studies, n=315) and 3.7% (range, 1.3‑7.9%) for BRCA2 (six studies, n=945). In total, 88% of studies were at a high risk of bias. The prevalence of DDR gene mutations in PC varied widely within somatic subgroups depending on study size, genetic screening techniques, DDR mutation definition and PC diagnosis; somatic and/or germline DDR mutation prevalence was in the range of 23‑27% in PC. These findings support DDR mutation testing for all patients with PC (including those with mCRPC). With the advent of the latest clinical practice PC guidelines highlighting the importance of DDR mutation screening, and ongoing mCRPC clinical trials evaluating DDR mutation‑targeted drugs, future larger epidemiological studies are warranted to further quantify the international burden of DDR mutations in PC.

6-Thioguanine and Its Analogs Promote Apoptosis of Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Cells in a BRCA2-Dependent Manner

Background: Mutations in the oncosuppressor gene BReast CAncer susceptibility gene 2 (BRCA2) predispose to aggressive forms of prostate cancer which show poor response to taxane-based therapy, the standard treatment for castration-resistant, aggressive prostate cancer. Herein, we addressed the question whether changes in BRCA2 expression, a potential surrogate marker for BRCA2 activity, may affect the response of castration-resistant prostate cancer cells to 6-thioguanine (6-TG), a thiopurine used in the treatment of haematological malignancies. Methods: Yeast, normal prostate cells and castration-resistant prostate cancer cells were treated with 6-TG or its analogues, in presence or absence of paclitaxel, or with olaparib, a poly-(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor currently in clinical trials for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and cell proliferation, apoptosis and androgen receptor (AR) levels were measured. Results: 6-TG inhibited cell proliferation in yeast, normal and castration-resistant prostate cancer cells but promoted apoptosis only in cancer cells. Suppression of BRCA2 expression by siRNA or shRNA increased the sensitivity to 6-TG- and olaparib-induced apoptosis but did not affect cancer cell response to taxane. Intriguingly, 6-TG reduced AR expression levels independently on BRCA2 expression. Instead, olaparib decreased AR levels only in BRCA2-knockdown prostate cancer cells. Notably, overexpression of BRCA2 resulted in resistance of castration-resistant prostate cancer cells to 6-TG-, taxane- and olaparib-based treatment but promoted sensitivity to apoptosis induced by 2-amino-6-bromopurine and 2,6-dithiopurine, two 6-TG analogues. Conclusions: Our results provide a pre-clinical rationale for the use of 6-TG in the treatment of BRCA2-deficient castration-resistant prostate cancers, and of certain 6-TG analogues for treatment of BRCA2-proficient prostate cancers.

Identification of Novel Biomarkers of Homologous Recombination Defect in DNA Repair to Predict Sensitivity of Prostate Cancer Cells to PARP-Inhibitors

One of the most common malignancies in men is prostate cancer, for which androgen deprivation is the standard therapy. However, prostate cancer cells become insensitive to anti-androgen treatment and proceed to a castration-resistant state with limited therapeutic options. Therefore, besides the androgen deprivation approach, novel biomarkers are urgently required for specific targeting in this deadly disease. Recently, germline or somatic mutations in the homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair genes have been identified in at least 20–25% of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers (mCRPC). Defects in genes involved in HR DNA repair can sensitize cancer cells to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, a class of drugs already approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for breast and ovarian cancer carrying germline mutations in BRCA1/2 genes. For advanced prostate cancer carrying Breast cancer1/2 (BRCA1/2) or ataxia telengiectasia mutated (ATM) mutations, preclinical studies and clinical trials support the use of PARP-inhibitors, which received breakthrough therapy designation by the FDA. Based on these assumptions, several trials including DNA damage response and repair (DDR) targeting have been launched and are ongoing for prostate cancer. Here, we review the state-of-the-art potential biomarkers that could be predictive of cancer cell synthetic lethality with PARP inhibitors. The identification of key molecules that are affected in prostate cancer could be assayed in future clinical studies to better stratify prostate cancer patients who might benefit from target therapy.

The association of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations with prostate cancer risk, frequency, and mortality: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A prior meta-analysis found no association between BRCA1 mutation and prostate cancer (PCa). Subsequent BRCA2 mutation studies have shown an association with PCa risk and mortality. We conducted a meta-analysis of overall BRCA mutation carriers and in subgroups to (1) estimate PCa risk in BRCA mutation carriers, (2) evaluate the frequency of BRCA mutation carriers in patients with PCa, and (3) compare cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) among BRCA mutation carriers and noncarriers.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Unadjusted odds ratio (OR), percentage (%), and hazard ratio (HR) were used to calculate pooled estimates for PCa risk, frequency, and survival, respectively. Subgroup analyses by mutation type ( BRCA1 or BRCA2) were conducted for the three objectives. Further subgroup analyses by study design (age-sex-adjusted or crude), ascertainment method (ascertained or inferred genotyping), population (Ashkenazi Jewish or general population), and survival outcomes (CSS or OS) were conducted. The associations were evaluated using random-effects models, in two-sided statistical tests.

RESULTS

A total of 8 cohort, 7 case-control, 4 case-series, 28 frequency, and 11 survival studies were included. Being a BRCA mutation carrier ( BRCA1 and/or BRCA2) was associated with a significant increase in PCa risk (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.58-2.29), with BRCA2 mutation being associated with a greater risk of PCa (OR = 2.64, 95% CI = 2.03-3.47) than BRCA1 (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.03-1.76). The frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers in patients with PCa was 0.9% and 2.2%, respectively. OS (HR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.64-2.30) and CSS (HR = 2.63, 95% CI = 2.00-3.45) were significantly worse among BRCA2 carriers compared to noncarriers, whereas OS (HR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.11-1.99) and CSS (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.38-2.96) were statistically not significant when comparing BRCA1 carriers and noncarriers.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a 1.90-fold greater risk of PCa in overall BRCA mutation carriers. This elevated PCa risk is attributable mainly to a 2.64-fold greater risk of PCa in BRCA2 carriers compared to a moderate 1.35-fold greater risk in BRCA1 carriers. The frequency of BRCA2 mutations was higher than BRCA1 mutations among patients with PCa. BRCA2 but not BRCA1 mutations were associated with higher PCa mortality. The BRCA mutation may be a clinical factor to stratify high-risk patients and guide clinical strategies for more effective treatments for patients with PCa.

The Role of BRCA Testing in Hereditary Pancreatic and Prostate Cancer Families

Beyond breast and ovarian cancers, mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes increase risks for pancreatic and prostate cancers and contribute to the prevalence of these cancers. Mutations in a number of other genes have also been shown to increase the risk for these cancers as well. Genetic testing is playing an increasingly important role in the treatment of patients with pancreatic and prostate cancer and is now recommended for all patients with pancreatic or metastatic prostate cancer, as well as patients with high Gleason grade prostate cancer and a remarkable family history. Identification of an inherited mutation can direct evaluation of the patient for other cancer risks as well as identification and management of disease in at-risk relatives. Growing evidence suggests improved responses to PARP inhibitors and other therapies in patients with mutations in the BRCA and other DNA repair genes. Although more work must be done to clarify the prevalence and penetrance of mutations in genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 in patients with pancreatic and prostate cancer, in most cases, testing is now being done with a panel of multiple genes. Because of the complexities in panel testing and the increased likelihood of finding variants of uncertain significance, pre- and post-test genetic counseling are essential.

Current progress and questions in germline genetics of prostate cancer

Dramatic progress has been made in the area of germline genetics of prostate cancer (PCa) in the past decade. Both common and rare genetic variants with effects on risk ranging from barely detectable to outright practice-changing have been identified. For men with high risk PCa, the application of genetic testing for inherited pathogenic mutations is becoming standard of care. A major question exists about which additional populations of men to test, as men at all risk levels can potentially benefit by knowing their unique genetic profile of germline susceptibility variants. This article will provide a brief overview of some current issues in understanding inherited susceptibility for PCa.

DNA repair defects in prostate cancer: impact for screening, prognostication and treatment

Failure of effective DNA damage repair is a hallmark of cancer, but was previously underappreciated as a driver of aggressive prostate cancer. However, recent international sequencing efforts have revealed that both germline and somatic alterations within the homologous recombination and mismatch repair pathways are relatively common in lethal metastatic disease. BRCA2 gene alterations are particularly prevalent and are linked to poor prognosis as well as poor responses to systemic therapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer, although there is conflicting support for the latter. Defective DNA repair contributes to tumour heterogeneity, evolution and progression, but there are high hopes that management of this aggressive subset will be transformed by biomarker-driven use of poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy. In this review, we detail the relationship between DNA repair defects and prostate cancer, highlighting the prevalence of mutations in key genes and their controversial association with clinical outcomes.

Male Oncology Research and Education program for men at high risk for prostate cancer

Three groups of men are at high risk of developing prostate cancer: men with a strong family history of prostate cancer, men of West African or Caribbean ancestry, and men with a germline pathogenic variant in a prostate cancer-associated gene. Despite the fact that those men constitute a significant portion of the male population in North America, few recommendations for prostate cancer screening specific to them have been developed. For men at general population risk for prostate cancer, screening based on prostate-specific antigen (psa) has remained controversial despite the abundance of literature on the topic. As a result, recommendations made by major screening authorities are inconsistent (ranging from no psa screening to baseline psa screening at age 45), allowing physicians to pick and choose how to screen their patients. The Male Oncology Research and Education (more) program is an observational research program that serves as an academic platform for multiple research foci. For its participants, serum and dna are biobanked, medical information is collected, and contact for relevant research-related opportunities is maintained. This research program is paired with a specialized clinic called the more clinic, where men at high risk are regularly screened for prostate cancer in a standard approach that includes physical examination and serum psa measurement. In this article, we describe the goals, participant accrual to date, and projects specific to this unique program.

Prostate Cancer Genomics: Recent Advances and the Prevailing Underrepresentation from Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Prostate cancer (CaP) is the most commonly diagnosed non-cutaneous cancer and the second leading cause of male cancer deaths in the United States. Among African American (AA) men, CaP is the most prevalent malignancy, with disproportionately higher incidence and mortality rates. Even after discounting the influence of socioeconomic factors, the effect of molecular and genetic factors on racial disparity of CaP is evident. Earlier studies on the molecular basis for CaP disparity have focused on the influence of heritable mutations and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Most CaP susceptibility alleles identified based on genome-wide association studies (GWAS) were common, low-penetrance variants. Germline CaP-associated mutations that are highly penetrant, such as those found in HOXB13 and BRCA2, are usually rare. More recently, genomic studies enabled by Next-Gen Sequencing (NGS) technologies have focused on the identification of somatic mutations that contribute to CaP tumorigenesis. These studies confirmed the high prevalence of ERG gene fusions and PTEN deletions among Caucasian Americans and identified novel somatic alterations in SPOP and FOXA1 genes in early stages of CaP. Individuals with African ancestry and other minorities are often underrepresented in these large-scale genomic studies, which are performed primarily using tumors from men of European ancestry. The insufficient number of specimens from AA men and other minority populations, together with the heterogeneity in the molecular etiology of CaP across populations, challenge the generalizability of findings from these projects. Efforts to close this gap by sequencing larger numbers of tumor specimens from more diverse populations, although still at an early stage, have discovered distinct genomic alterations. These research findings can have a direct impact on the diagnosis of CaP, the stratification of patients for treatment, and can help to address the disparity in incidence and mortality of CaP. This review examines the progress of understanding in CaP genetics and genomics and highlight the need to increase the representation from minority populations.

BRCA2 mutations should be screened early and routinely as markers of poor prognosis: evidence from 8,988 patients with prostate cancer

The aim of this study was to focus on clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis in men with prostate cancer (PCa) harboring a breast cancer 2 (BRCA2) gene mutation and to offer convincing evidence to consider BRCA2 mutation as a marker of poor prognosis in the molecular classification of PCa. We searched relevant articles from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases to evaluate the differences in the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) between BRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers in patients with PCa. We included 525 BRCA2 mutation-carriers and 8,463 non-carriers in total from 10 studies in our meta-analysis. The results showed that carrying a BRCA2 mutation was correlated with a reduced CSS and OS when compared with that of non-carriers, with pooled Hazard Ratios (HRs) of 2.53 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.10–3.06, P < 0.001) and 2.21 (95% CI: 1.64–2.99, P < 0.001), respectively. The results also demonstrated that BRCA2 mutation-carriers harbored a higher Gleason Score (GS) (> 7), TNM stage (> T3, N1, M1), and risk level than non-carriers. Our meta-analysis showed that a BRCA2 mutation predicted poor survival outcomes in patients with prostate cancer, especially in those undergoing treatments with radiotherapy. Therefore, the use of BRCA2 mutation as a clinical prognostic factor could help stratify the high-risk patients and provide clinical strategies for more effective targeted treatments for patients with prostate cancer.

Role of Genetic Testing for Inherited Prostate Cancer Risk: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2017

Purpose Guidelines are limited for genetic testing for prostate cancer (PCA). The goal of this conference was to develop an expert consensus-driven working framework for comprehensive genetic evaluation of inherited PCA in the multigene testing era addressing genetic counseling, testing, and genetically informed management. Methods An expert consensus conference was convened including key stakeholders to address genetic counseling and testing, PCA screening, and management informed by evidence review. Results Consensus was strong that patients should engage in shared decision making for genetic testing. There was strong consensus to test HOXB13 for suspected hereditary PCA, BRCA1/2 for suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and DNA mismatch repair genes for suspected Lynch syndrome. There was strong consensus to factor BRCA2 mutations into PCA screening discussions. BRCA2 achieved moderate consensus for factoring into early-stage management discussion, with stronger consensus in high-risk/advanced and metastatic setting. Agreement was moderate to test all men with metastatic castration-resistant PCA, regardless of family history, with stronger agreement to test BRCA1/2 and moderate agreement to test ATM to inform prognosis and targeted therapy. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive, multidisciplinary consensus statement to address a genetic evaluation framework for inherited PCA in the multigene testing era. Future research should focus on developing a working definition of familial PCA for clinical genetic testing, expanding understanding of genetic contribution to aggressive PCA, exploring clinical use of genetic testing for PCA management, genetic testing of African American males, and addressing the value framework of genetic evaluation and testing men at risk for PCA-a clinically heterogeneous disease.

Prostate cancer screening-when to start and how to screen?

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening reduces prostate cancer (PCa) mortality; however such screening may lead to harm in terms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Therefore, upfront shared decision making involving a discussion about pros and cons between a physician and a patient is crucial. Total PSA remains the most commonly used screening tool and is a strong predictor of future life-threatening PCa. Currently there is no strong consensus on the age at which to start PSA screening. Most guidelines recommend PSA screening to start no later than at age 55 and involve well-informed men in good health and a life expectancy of at least 10–15 years. Some suggest to start screening in early midlife for men with familial predisposition and men of African-American descent. Others suggest starting conversations at age 45 for all men. Re-screening intervals can be risk-stratified as guided by the man’s age, general health and PSA-value; longer intervals for those at lower risk and shorter intervals for those at higher risk. Overdiagnosis and unnecessary biopsies can be reduced using reflex tests. Magnetic resonance imaging in the pre-diagnostic setting holds promise in pilot studies and large-scale prospective studies are ongoing.

Predicting prostate cancer progression: protocol for a retrospective cohort study to identify prognostic factors for prostate cancer outcomes using routine primary care data

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the UK, with nearly 40 000 diagnosed in 2014; and it is the second most common cause of male cancer-related mortality. The clinical conundrum is that most men live with prostate cancer rather than die from it, while existing treatments have significant associated morbidity. Recent studies have shown very low mortality rates (1% after a median of 10-year follow-up) and no treatment-related reductions in mortality, in men with localised prostate cancer. This study will identify prognostic factors associated with prostate cancer progression to help differentiate aggressive from more indolent tumours in men with localised disease at diagnosis, and so inform the decision to adopt conservative (active surveillance) or radical (surgery or radiotherapy) management strategies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) contains 57 318 men who were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1 January 1987 and 31 December 2016. These men will be linked to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service registry databases for mortality, TNM stage, Gleason grade and treatment data. Men with a diagnosis date prior to 1 January 1987 and men with lymph node or distant metastases at diagnosis will be excluded. A priori determined prognostic factors potentially associated with prostate cancer mortality, the end point of cancer progression, will be measured at baseline, and the participants followed through to development of cancer progression, death or the end of the follow-up period (31 December 2016). Cox proportional hazards regression will be used to estimate crude and mutually adjusted HRs. Mortality risk will be predicted using flexible parametric survival models that can accurately fit the shape of the hazard function.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study protocol has approval from the Independent Scientific Advisory Committee for the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Database Research (protocol 17_041). The findings will be presented in peer-reviewed journals and local CPRD researcher meetings.

Germline BRCA mutation in male carriers-ripe for precision oncology?

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the known heritable cancers with individual variations attributed to genetic factors. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumour suppressor genes with crucial roles in repairing DNA and thereby maintaining genomic integrity. Germline BRCA mutations predispose to multiple familial tumour types including PC.

METHODS

We performed a Pubmed database search along with review of reference lists from prominent articles to capture papers exploring the association between BRCA mtuations and prostate cancer risk and prognosis. Articles were retrieved until May 2017 and filtered for relevance, and publication type.

RESULTS

We explored familial PC genetics; discussed the discovery and magnitude of the association between BRCA mutations and PC risk and outcome; examined implications of factoring BRCA mutations into PC screening; and discussed the rationale for chemoprevention in this high-risk population. We confirmed that BRCA1/2 mutations confer an up to 4.5-fold and 8.3-fold increased risk of PC, respectively. BRCA2 mutations are associated with an increased risk of high-grade disease, progression to metastatic castration-resistant disease, and 5-year cancer-specific survival rates of 50 to 60%.

CONCLUSION

Despite the growing body of research on DNA repair genes, deeper analysis is needed to understand the aetiological role of germline BRCA mutations in the natural history of PC. There is a need for awareness to screen for this marker of PC risk. There is similarly an opportunity for structured PC screening programs for BRCA mutation carriers. Finally, further research is required to identify potential chemopreventive strategies for this high-risk subgroup.

The association between germline BRCA2 variants and sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy among men with metastatic prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer 2 (BRCA2)-associated breast and ovarian cancers are sensitive to platinum-based chemotherapy. It is unknown whether BRCA2-associated prostate cancer responds favorably to such treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a single-institution cohort of men with castration-resistant, metastatic prostate cancer was performed to determine the association between carrier status of pathogenic BRCA2 germline variants and prostate-specific antigen response to carboplatin-based chemotherapy. From 2001 through 2015, 8081 adult men with prostate cancer who had a consultation and/or underwent treatment at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute provided blood samples and consented to analyses of biologic material and clinical records. A subgroup of 141 men received at least 2 doses of carboplatin and docetaxel for castration-resistant disease (94% were also taxane refractory). These patients were categorized according to the absence or presence of pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA2 based on DNA sequencing from whole blood. The primary outcome was the response rate to carboplatin/docetaxel chemotherapy, defined according to a decline in prostate-specific antigen that exceeded 50% within 12 weeks of initiating this regimen. Associations between BRCA2 mutation status and response to carboplatin-based chemotherapy were tested using the Fisher exact test, with a 2-sided P value < .05 as the threshold for significance.

RESULTS

Pathogenic germline BRCA2 variants were observed in 8 of 141 men (5.7%; 95% confidence interval, 2.5%-10.9%). Six of 8 BRCA2 carriers (75%) experienced prostate-specific antigen declines >50% within 12 weeks, compared with 23 of 133 noncarriers (17%; absolute difference, 58%; 95% confidence interval, 27%-88%; P < .001). Prostate cancer cell lines functionally corroborated these clinical findings.

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA2-associated, castration-resistant prostate cancer is associated with a higher likelihood of response to carboplatin-based chemotherapy than non-BRCA2-associated prostate cancer. Cancer 2017;123:3532-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Treatment strategies for DNA repair-deficient prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Common recurrent genetic alterations have been identified in prostate cancer through comprehensive sequencing efforts, and the prevalence of mutations in DNA repair pathway genes in patients with advanced and metastatic disease approaches 20-25%. Identification of these underlying DNA repair defects may present unique treatment opportunities for patients, both in terms of standard-of-care treatments and selected investigational agents. Areas covered: We review our current understanding of the genomic landscape of prostate cancer, with special attention to alterations in DNA repair pathway genes in metastatic castration-resistant disease. For patients with tumors deficient in homologous recombination repair, potential opportunities for treatment include platinum chemotherapy, poly(ADP) ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, bipolar androgen therapy, and maybe immune checkpoint blockade therapy. In addition, tumors with mismatch repair defects (i.e. microsatellite instability) may be particularly susceptible to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Expert commentary: We anticipate that genomic profiling of tumors will become necessary to guide treatment of advanced prostate cancer in the coming years. Work is needed to define the optimal tissue to test, and to define the natural history of tumors with specific genetic defects. The prognostic and therapeutic importance of germline vs somatic DNA repair alterations, and mono-allelic vs bi-allelic inactivation, also remains unclear. Finally, optimal strategies to sequence or combine targeted agents for these patients with 'actionable' mutations are now needed.

Analysis of resistance-associated gene expression in docetaxel-resistant prostate cancer cells

Docetaxel-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). However, a number of patients with metastatic CRPC are refractory to docetaxel or develop docetaxel resistance. The underlying molecular mechanisms of docetaxel resistance remain unclear, which is a significant burden to the management of metastatic prostate cancer. In the present study, the differential gene expression between docetaxel-sensitive (PC3) and docetaxel-resistant (PC3DR2) prostate cancer cells was identified using DNA microarrays, western blot analysis and reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Of the genes implicated in cancer-associated pathways, insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor, DBF4 homolog, sterile α motif and leucine zipper-containing kinase AZK, Patched 1, serpin peptidase inhibitor, clade E, member 1 and breast cancer 2 (BRCA2) were >3-fold upregulated in PC3DR2 cells compared with PC3 cells. BRCA2 knockdown with small interfering RNA decreased the docetaxel resistance of PC3DR2 cells. These results suggest that BRCA2 serves an important role in the docetaxel resistance of prostate cancer cells. In addition, BRCA2 modulation may be a strategy to partially reverse docetaxel resistance in prostate cancer.

BRCA-associated Cancers: Role of Imaging in Screening, Diagnosis, and Management

Harmful mutations of the BRCA tumor suppressor genes result in a greater lifetime risk for malignancy-breast and ovarian cancers in particular. An increased risk for male breast, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal, pancreatic, prostate, and colon cancers also has been reported. The BRCA gene is inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern and tends to be highly penetrant; thus, there is an increased incidence of these cancers in affected families. Compared with sporadic tumors, BRCA-associated malignancies have unique manifestations, clinical features, and pathologic profiles. Manifestation at an early patient age, high-grade tumors, and an aggressive clinical course are common features of BRCA-associated malignancies. Understanding the behavior of these cancers aids in identification of affected individuals and families, who can then make informed decisions regarding their future health. Enhanced screening, prophylactic surgery, and chemoprevention are options for managing cancer risk factors in these individuals. Imaging has an important role in the screening, evaluation, staging, and follow-up of BRCA-associated malignancies. Supplemental screening of BRCA mutation carriers often begins at an early age and is critical for early and accurate cancer diagnoses. The authors review the etiopathogenesis and imaging features of BRCA-associated malignancies, the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to determining the diagnosis, and the treatment of patients who have these mutations to improve their outcomes. ^© RSNA, 2017.

Inherited Mutations in Men Undergoing Multigene Panel Testing for Prostate Cancer: Emerging Implications for Personalized Prostate Cancer Genetic Evaluation

PURPOSE

Multigene panels are commercially available for the evaluation of prostate cancer (PCA) predisposition, which necessitates tailored genetic counseling (GC) for men. Here we describe emerging results of Genetic Evaluation of Men, prospective multigene testing study in PCA to inform personalized genetic counseling, with emerging implications for referrals, cancer screening, and precision therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligibility criteria for men affected by or at high risk for PCA encompass age, race, family history (FH), and PCA stage/grade. Detailed demographic, clinical, and FH data were obtained from participants and medical records. Multigene testing was conducted after GC. Mutation rates were summarized by eligibility criteria and compared across FH data. The 95% CI of mutation prevalence was constructed by using Poisson distribution.

RESULTS

Of 200 men enrolled, 62.5% had PCA. Eleven (5.5%; 95% CI, 3.0% to 9.9%) had mutations; 63.6% of mutations were in DNA repair genes. FH of breast cancer was significantly associated with mutation status (P = .004), and FH that met criteria for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome was significantly associated with PCA (odds ratio, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.05 to 5.18). Variants of uncertain significance were reported in 70 men (35.0%). Among mutation carriers, 45.5% had personal/FH concordant with the gene. A tailored GC model was developed based on emerging findings.

CONCLUSION

Multigene testing for PCA identifies mutations mostly in DNA repair genes, with implications for precision therapy. The study highlights the importance of comprehensive genetic evaluation for PCA beyond metastatic disease, including early-stage disease with strong FH. Detailed FH is important for referrals of men for genetic evaluation. The results inform precision GC and cancer screening for men and their male and female blood relatives.

Germline BRCA2 mutations drive prostate cancers with distinct evolutionary trajectories

Germline mutations in the BRCA2 tumour suppressor are associated with both an increased lifetime risk of developing prostate cancer (PCa) and increased risk of aggressive disease. To understand this aggression, here we profile the genomes and methylomes of localized PCa from 14 carriers of deleterious germline BRCA2 mutations (BRCA2-mutant PCa). We show that BRCA2-mutant PCa harbour increased genomic instability and a mutational profile that more closely resembles metastastic than localized disease. BRCA2-mutant PCa shows genomic and epigenomic dysregulation of the MED12L/MED12 axis, which is frequently dysregulated in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This dysregulation is enriched in BRCA2-mutant PCa harbouring intraductal carcinoma (IDC). Microdissection and sequencing of IDC and juxtaposed adjacent non-IDC invasive carcinoma in 10 patients demonstrates a common ancestor to both histopathologies. Overall we show that localized castration-sensitive BRCA2-mutant tumours are uniquely aggressive, due to de novo aberration in genes usually associated with metastatic disease, justifying aggressive initial treatment.

Men that carrier BRCA2 germline mutations are at risk of developing prostate cancer. Here, the authors analyse the genomes of prostate cancer from these individuals and demonstrate increased genomic instability in comparison to sporadic prostate cancer.

Germline Mutations in ATM and BRCA1/2 Distinguish Risk for Lethal and Indolent Prostate Cancer and are Associated with Early Age at Death

BACKGROUND

Germline mutations in BRCA1/2 and ATM have been associated with prostate cancer (PCa) risk.

OBJECTIVE

To directly assess whether germline mutations in these three genes distinguish lethal from indolent PCa and whether they confer any effect on age at death.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective case-case study of 313 patients who died of PCa and 486 patients with low-risk localized PCa of European, African, and Chinese descent. Germline DNA of each of the 799 patients was sequenced for these three genes.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Mutation carrier rates and their effect on lethal PCa were analyzed using the Fisher's exact test and Cox regression analysis, respectively.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The combined BRCA1/2 and ATM mutation carrier rate was significantly higher in lethal PCa patients (6.07%) than localized PCa patients (1.44%), p=0.0007. The rate also differed significantly among lethal PCa patients as a function of age at death (10.00%, 9.08%, 8.33%, 4.94%, and 2.97% in patients who died ≤ 60 yr, 61-65 yr, 66-70 yr, 71-75 yr, and over 75 yr, respectively, p=0.046) and time to death after diagnosis (12.26%, 4.76%, and 0.98% in patients who died ≤ 5 yr, 6-10 yr, and>10 yr after a PCa diagnosis, respectively, p=0.0006). Survival analysis in the entire cohort revealed mutation carriers remained an independent predictor of lethal PCa after adjusting for race and age, prostate-specific antigen, and Gleason score at the time of diagnosis (hazard ratio=2.13, 95% confidence interval: 1.24-3.66, p=0.004). A limitation of this study is that other DNA repair genes were not analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Mutation status of BRCA1/2 and ATM distinguishes risk for lethal and indolent PCa and is associated with earlier age at death and shorter survival time.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate cancer patients with inherited mutations in BRCA1/2 and ATM are more likely to die of prostate cancer and do so at an earlier age.

Implications of High Rates of Metastatic Prostate Cancer in BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

BACKGROUND

Patients with germline BRCA2 gene mutations (BRCA2mut) have more aggressive prostate cancer. Analysis of all reported germline BRCA2mut prostate cancer cases allows better understanding of the clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes of these men.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed with the MEDLINE database to capture articles evaluating clinicopathologic characteristics of men with BRCA2mut associated prostate cancer. Inclusion criteria were at least five subjects, confirmation of BRCA2mut status, and data for at least 2 clinical parameters of disease. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes data. Chi-squared tests were used to compare disease features among men undergoing formal versus ad hoc screening, as well as an age of diagnosis less than versus greater than 65 years. Rates of metastatic disease among BRCA2mut cases were compared to rates among non-carrier control subjects and the general population using the SEER database.

RESULTS

Twelve out of 289 studies met our inclusion criteria, representing 261 BRCA2mut men. Among carriers, the median age at diagnosis was 62 years and median PSA was 15 ng/dl with 95% of men having a PSA>3. Over 40% of BRCA2mut patients had T3/T4 disease and over 25% were metastatic at presentation. Survival was worse in BRCA2mut men with prostate cancer when compared to non-BRCA2mut subjects. BRCA2mut carriers had significantly higher rates of metastatic disease (18%) versus non-carrier controls (8%) and the SEER population (4%).

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA2mut carriers are more likely to have poor risk of prostate cancer at presentation and exhibit worse oncologic outcomes relative to non-carriers, including a fourfold increase in metastatic disease. Younger men and those undergoing formal screening present with less advanced disease which supports a need for earlier identification and screening protocols. Additionally, this population may benefit from alternative therapeutic paradigms. Prostate 76:1135-1145, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Familial prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men in the United States as well as most Western countries. A significant proportion of men report having a positive family history of prostate cancer in a first-degree relative (father, brother, son), which is important in that family history is one of the only established risk factors for the disease and plays a role in decision-making for prostate cancer screening. Familial aggregation of prostate cancer is considered a surrogate marker of genetic susceptibility to developing the disease, but shared environment cannot be excluded as an explanation for clustering of cases among family members. Prostate cancer is both a clinically and genetically heterogeneous disease with inherited factors predicted to account for 40%-50% of cases, comprised of both rare highly to moderately penetrant gene variants, as well as common genetic variants of low penetrance. Most notably, HOXB13 and BRCA2 mutations have been consistently shown to increase prostate cancer risk, and are more commonly observed among patients diagnosed with early-onset disease. A recurrent mutation in HOXB13 has been shown to predispose to hereditary prostate cancer (HPC), and BRCA2 mutations to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have also identified approximately 100 loci that associate with modest (odds ratios <2.0) increases in prostate cancer risk, only some of which have been replicated in subsequent studies. Despite these efforts, genetic testing in prostate cancer lags behind other common tumors like breast and colorectal cancer. To date, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines have highly selective criteria for BRCA1/2 testing for men with prostate cancer based on personal history and/or specific family cancer history. Tumor sequencing is also leading to the identification of germline mutations in prostate cancer patients, informing the scope of inheritance. Advances in genetic testing for inherited and familial prostate cancer (FPC) are needed to inform personalized cancer risk screening and treatment approaches.