Comparison of Characteristics, Follow-up and Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer According to Ethnicity in the GAP3 Global Consortium Database

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

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

Best Current Practice and Research Priorities in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer-A Report of a Movember International Consensus Meeting

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) is recommended for low-risk and some intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Uptake and practice of AS vary significantly across different settings, as does the experience of surveillance-from which tests are offered, and to the levels of psychological support.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the current best practice and determine the most important research priorities in AS for prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A formal consensus process was followed, with an international expert panel of purposively sampled participants across a range of health care professionals and researchers, and those with lived experience of prostate cancer. Statements regarding the practice of AS and potential research priorities spanning the patient journey from surveillance to initiating treatment were developed.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Panel members scored each statement on a Likert scale. The group median score and measure of consensus were presented to participants prior to discussion and rescoring at panel meetings. Current best practice and future research priorities were identified, agreed upon, and finally ranked by panel members.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

There was consensus agreement that best practice includes the use of high-quality magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which allows digital rectal examination (DRE) to be omitted, that repeat standard biopsy can be omitted when MRI and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics are stable, and that changes in PSA or DRE should prompt MRI ± biopsy rather than immediate active treatment. The highest ranked research priority was a dynamic, risk-adjusted AS approach, reducing testing for those at the least risk of progression. Improving the tests used in surveillance, ensuring equity of access and experience across different patients and settings, and improving information and communication between and within clinicians and patients were also high priorities. Limitations include the use of a limited number of panel members for practical reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

The current best practice in AS includes the use of high-quality MRI to avoid DRE and as the first assessment for changes in PSA, with omission of repeat standard biopsy when PSA and MRI are stable. Development of a robust, dynamic, risk-adapted approach to surveillance is the highest research priority in AS for prostate cancer.

PATIENT SUMMARY

A diverse group of experts in active surveillance, including a broad range of health care professionals and researchers and those with lived experience of prostate cancer, agreed that best practice includes the use of high-quality magnetic resonance imaging, which can allow digital rectal examination and some biopsies to be omitted. The highest research priority in active surveillance research was identified as the development of a dynamic, risk-adjusted approach.

Five-Year Prospective Observational Study of African-American Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer Demonstrates Race Is Not Predictive of Oncologic Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate if race impacted outcomes or risk of disease progression in men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. We present the results from our majority African-American cohort of men in an equal access setting over a 5-year follow-up period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who elected AS for prostate cancer at the Southeast Louisiana Veterans Health Care System are entered into a prospectively managed observational database. Patients were divided into groups based on self-reported race. Grade group progression was defined as pathologic upgrading above International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group 1 disease on subsequent biopsies following diagnostic biopsy. All tests were 2 sided using a significance of .05.

RESULTS

A total of 228 men met inclusion criteria in the study, including 154 non-Hispanic African American and 74 non-Hispanic Caucasian American men, with a median follow-up of 5 years from the initiation of AS. Race was not predictive of Gleason grade progression, AS discontinuation, or biochemical recurrence on Cox multivariate analysis (HR = 1.01, 0.94, 0.85, P = .96, .79, .81, respectively). On Kaplan-Meier analysis at 5 years, African-American progression-free, AS discontinuation free, and overall survival probability was comparable to their Caucasian American counterparts (P > .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance is a safe treatment option for low and very low risk prostate cancer, regardless of race. African-American and Caucasian-American men did not have any significant difference in Gleason grade group progression in our cohort with 5-year follow-up.