Factors predicting Gleason score 6 upgrading after radical prostatectomy

Clinical outcome comparison of Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 prostate cancer with and without cribriform architecture at the time of radical prostatectomy

Aims

Invasive cribriform and intraductal carcinoma are associated with aggressive disease in Grade Group 2 (GG2) prostate cancer patients. However, the characteristics and clinical outcome of patients with GG2 prostate cancer without cribriform architecture (GG2−) as compared with those with Grade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and pathological characteristics of GG1 and GG2− prostate cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens.

Methods and results

We reviewed 835 radical prostatectomy specimens for Grade Group, pT stage, surgical margin status, and the presence of cribriform architecture. Biochemical recurrence‐free survival and metastasis were used as clinical outcomes. GG1 prostate cancer was seen in 207 patients, and GG2 prostate cancer was seen in 420 patients, of whom 228 (54%) showed cribriform architecture (GG2+) and 192 (46%) did not. GG2− patients had higher prostate‐specific antigen levels (9.4 ng/ml versus 7.0 ng/ml; P < 0.001), more often had extraprostatic extension (36% versus 11%; P < 0.001) and had more positive surgical margins (27% versus 17%; P = 0.01) than GG1 patients. GG2− patients had shorter biochemical recurrence‐free survival (hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.4–4.9; P = 0.002) than GG1 patients. Lymph node and distant metastasis were observed neither in GG2− nor in GG1 patients, but occurred in 22 of 228 (10%) GG2+ patients.

Conclusion

In conclusion, patients with GG2− prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy have more advanced disease and shorter biochemical recurrence‐free survival than those with GG1 prostate cancer, but both groups have a very low risk of developing metastasis.

PI-RADS 3 Lesions: Role of Prostate MRI Texture Analysis in the Identification of Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the diagnostic performance of texture analysis of prostate MRI for the diagnosis of prostate cancer among Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-three patients with at least 1 PI-RADS 3 lesion on prostate MRI performed between June 2016 and January 2019 were retrospectively included. Reference standard was pathological analysis of radical prostatectomy specimens or MRI-targeted biopsies. Texture analysis extraction of target lesions was performed on axial T2-weighted images and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps using a radiomic software. Lesions were categorized as prostate cancer (Gleason score [GS] ≥ 6), and no prostate cancer. Statistical analysis was performed using the generalized linear model (GLM) regression and the discriminant analysis (DA). AUROC with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess the diagnostic performance of standalone features and predictive models for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (GS ≥ 6) and clinically-significant prostate cancer (GS ≥ 7).

RESULTS

The analysis of 46 PI-RADS 3 lesions (ie, 27 [58.7%] no prostate cancers; 19 [41.3%] prostate cancers) revealed 9 and 6 independent texture parameters significantly correlated with the final histopathological results on T2-weighted and ADC maps images, respectively. The resulting GLM and DA predictive models for the diagnosis of prostate cancer yielded an AUROC of 0.775 and 0.779 on T2-weighted images or 0.815 and 0.821 on ADC maps images. For the diagnosis of clinically-significant prostate cancer, the resulting GLM and DA predictive models for the diagnosis of prostate cancer yielded an AUROC of 0.769 and 0.817 on T2-weighted images or 0.749 and 0.744 on ADC maps images.

CONCLUSION

Texture analysis of PI-RADS 3 lesions on T2-weighted and ADC maps images helps identifying prostate cancer. The good diagnostic performance of the combination of multiple radiomic features for the diagnosis of prostate cancer may help predicting lesions where aggressive management may be warranted.

LacdiNAc-Glycosylated Prostate-specific Antigen Density is a Potential Biomarker of Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Serum LacdiNAc-glycosylated prostate-specific antigen (LDN-PSA) and LDN-PSA density together with PSA and PSA density (PSAD) were measured as a diagnostic tool for prostate cancer (PCa).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 150 patients with PCa without hormonal therapy and 41 patients without PCa obtained from the Kyoto University Hospital between 2012 and 2017. LDN-PSA levels were measured through a WFA-anti-PSA antibody sandwich immunoassay using a highly sensitive surface plasmon field-enhanced fluorescence spectroscopy (SPFS) system. Diagnostic performance of serum LDN-PSA and LDN-PSAD was evaluated by measuring the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The AUCs of LDN-PSA, LDN-PSAD, and PSAD levels (0.780, 0.848, and 0.835, respectively) detected in patients with PCa were significantly higher (P = .0001, P < .0001, and P < .0001, respectively) than that of PSA (0.590). Moreover, among 143 patients with PCa who received radical prostatectomy (RP), the AUCs of LDN-PSA, LDN-PSAD, and PSAD levels (0.750, 0.812, and 0.769, respectively) detected in patients with a pathologic Gleason grade group ≥ 2 were significantly higher (P = .0170, P = .0028, and P = .0003, respectively) than that of PSA (0.578). In the group comprising 35 patients who received RP with a Gleason grade group 1-graded biopsy, the LDN-PSA, LDN-PSAD, and PSAD levels were significantly different (P = .0097, P = .0024, and P = .0312, respectively). However, PSA alone could not discriminate cases with adverse features (P = .454).

CONCLUSIONS

LDN-PSAD is a potential marker for detecting PCa and selecting candidates for RP.

Is There Still a Need for Repeated Systematic Biopsies in Patients with Previous Negative Biopsies in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies of the Prostate?

BACKGROUND

The role of targeted prostate biopsies (TBs) in patients with cancer suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) following negative systematic biopsies (SBs) is undebated. However, whether they should be combined with repeated SBs remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the value of repeated SBs in addition to TBs in patients with a prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A prospective study as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted between 2014 and 2017, including 665 men with a prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of PCa (suspicious digital rectal examination and/or prostate-specific antigen >4.0ng/ml).

INTERVENTION

All patients underwent 3T mpMRI according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2. Patients with PI-RADS ≥3 were randomized 1:1:1 for three TB techniques: MRI-TRUS fusion TB (FUS-TB), cognitive registration fusion TB (COG-TB), or in-bore MRI TB. FUS-TB and COG-TB were combined with repeated SBs.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as Gleason ≥3+4. Differences in detection rates of csPCa, clinically insignificant PCa (cisPCa), and overall PCa between TBs (FUS-TB and COG-TB) and repeated SBs were compared using McNemar's test.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In the 152 patients who underwent both TB and SB, PCa was detected by TB in 47% and by SB in 32% (p<0.001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.0-22%). TB detected significantly more csPCa than SB (32% vs 16%; p<0.001, 95% CI: 11-25%). Clinically significant PCa was missed by TB in 1.3% (2/152). Combining SB and TB resulted in detection rate differences of 6.0% for PCa, 5.0% for cisPCa, and 1.0% for csPCa compared with TB alone.

CONCLUSIONS

In case of a persistent suspicion of PCa following a negative SB, TB detected significantly more csPCa cases than SB. The additional value of SB was limited, and only 1.3% of csPCa would have been missed when SB had been omitted.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated the role of systematic biopsies and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies for the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative systematic biopsies. MRI-targeted biopsies perform better in detecting prostate cancer in these patients. The value of repeated systematic biopsies is limited.

Risk of upgrading from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy pathology: Is magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy more accurate?

Background: This study compared magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy (MRI-GB) and transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) with the final histology of the radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen.

Methods: Our subjects were 229 patients with prostate cancer (PCa), proven histopathologically using MRI-GB or TRUS-GB, who underwent RP at our center between December 2015 and December 2016. The main group included 92 patients who underwent MRI-GB and the control group included 137 patients who underwent 12-core TRUS-GB. Histological findings for RP specimens were compared with those from biopsies. We also evaluated predictors of upgraded Gleason score (GS), using uni- and multivariate analyses.

Results: Upgraded GS between biopsy and RP specimen occurred to 22.7% (52/229) of the cohort overall. In univariate analysis, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) (P<0.001), prostate volume (PV) < 30 ml (P<0.001), biopsy modality (P=0.027), biopsy GS (P=0.032) and measured MRI lymph node metastasis (P=0.018) were prognostic factors. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed PV < 30 ml (P<0.001) and biopsy modality (P=0.001) were independent predictors of upgraded GS.

Conclusions: MRI-GB may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of prostate cancer detection in final histopathology with lower rate of upgraded GS than TRUS-GB. Also, PV < 30 ml and biopsy modality were independent predictors of upgraded GS.

Prostate volume and biopsy tumor length are significant predictors for classical and redefined insignificant cancer on prostatectomy specimens in Japanese men with favorable pathologic features on biopsy

Background

Gleason pattern 3 less often has molecular abnormalities and often behaves indolent. It is controversial whether low grade small foci of prostate cancer (PCa) on biopsy could avoid immediate treatment or not, because substantial cases harbor unfavorable pathologic results on prostatectomy specimens. This study was designed to identify clinical predictors for classical and redefined insignificant cancer on prostatectomy specimens in Japanese men with favorable pathologic features on biopsy.

Methods

Retrospective review of 1040 PCa Japanese patients underwent radical prostatectomy between 2006 and 2013. Of those, 170 patients (16.3%) met the inclusion criteria of clinical stage ≤ cT2a, Gleason score (GS) ≤ 6, up to two positive biopsies, and no more than 50% of cancer involvement in any core. The associations between preoperative data and unfavorable pathologic results of prostatectomy specimens, and oncological outcome were analyzed. The definition of insignificant cancer consisted of pathologic stage ≤ pT2, GS ≤ 6, and an index tumor volume < 0.5 mL (classical) or 1.3 mL (redefined).

Results

Pathologic stage ≥ pT3, upgraded GS, index tumor volume ≥ 0.5 mL, and ≥ 1.3 mL were detected in 25 (14.7%), 77 (45.3%), 83 (48.8%), and 53 patients (31.2%), respectively. Less than half of cases had classical (41.2%) and redefined (47.6%) insignificant cancer. The 5-year recurrence-free survival was 86.8%, and the insignificant cancers essentially did not relapse regardless of the surgical margin status. MRI-estimated prostate volume, tumor length on biopsy, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), and findings of magnetic resonance imaging were associated with the presence of classical and redefined insignificant cancer. Large prostate volume and short tumor length on biopsy remained as independent predictors in multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

Favorable features of biopsy often are followed by adverse pathologic findings on prostatectomy specimens despite fulfilling the established criteria. The finding that prostate volume is important does not simply mirror many other studies showing PSAD is important, and the clinical criteria for risk assessment before definitive therapy or active surveillance should incorporate these significant factors other than clinical T-staging or PSAD to minimize under-estimation of cancer in Japanese patients with low-risk PCa.

Evaluation of D'Amico criteria for low-risk prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to identify the risk of unfavourable disease (≥ pT3 and/or Gleason score ≥ 7) in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens and biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) after RP in patients with low-risk prostate cancer detected by D'Amico criteria before surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 2004 and 2007, 690 men underwent prostate biopsy and RP at a single university hospital. Of those, 248 patients (35.9%) had low-risk prostate cancer criteria. The endpoints of the study were detection of low-risk (pT2 and Gleason score ≤ 6) or unfavourable (≥ pT3 and/or Gleason score ≥ 7) prostate cancer, and BPFS. The risk of progression was analysed using multivariate Cox regression model and BPFS was established using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 60 months (1-112 months). pT3 was detected in 14.1%, and Gleason score ≥ 7 in 32.7% of patients. Unfavourable prostate cancer was detected in 37.5% of patients. Overall biochemical relapse rate was 13.6%. The estimated probability of 3-, 5- and 8-year BPFS for all study patients was 90.6%, 88.1% and 77.9%, respectively. Eight-year BPFS was 83.3% for low-risk prostate cancer and 68.2% for unfavourable prostate cancer (p = 0.007). Positive surgical margins (p = 0.0001) and postoperative Gleason score (p = 0.023) were the most significant predictors of biochemical relapse in Cox regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The D'Amico criteria may underestimate potentially aggressive prostate cancer in up to 37.5% of patients. Consequently, caution is recommended when the decision concerning the treatment modality is based on D'Amico criteria alone.