Literature DB >> 24320750

Clinical utility of a biopsy-based cell cycle gene expression assay in localized prostate cancer.

Neal Shore1, Raoul Concepcion, Daniel Saltzstein, M Scott Lucia, Arletta van Breda, William Welbourn, Nicolas Lewine, Gary Gustavsen, Kristin Pothier, Michael K Brawer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The CCP signature test (Prolaris) quantifies a patient's risk of disease progression and prostate cancer specific mortality using a gene-expression-based cell cycle progression (CCP) score. This study evaluated the potential clinical utility of the CCP test in a US-based clinical setting.
METHODS: Urologists who participated in a prospective clinical study were sent a retrospective questionnaire to assess the value of the CCP test result. Fifteen board-certified urologists participated in the study, representing 15 distinct community urology group practices. Questionnaires were received for 294 evaluable patients. All patients had localized prostate cancer (T1-T3b, N0, M0).
RESULTS: Physicians found the CCP score valuable and indicated that 55% of tests generated a mortality risk that was either higher or lower than expected. Physicians also indicated that 32% of test results would lead to a definite or possible change in treatment. The data suggest that the test would have the net effect of shifting patients from more aggressive treatment to more conservative treatment. This was evidenced by the significant association between change in treatment and lower CCP scores (p < 0.002) and by the fact that 62% of tests likely to lead to a definite or possible change in treatment had mortality risks lower than the physician expected versus only 10% with risks higher than expected. STUDY LIMITATIONS: This study measured the retrospectively assessed likelihood of change in treatment as estimated by the physician, not the actual change in treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The CCP score adds meaningful new information to risk assessment for localized prostate cancer patients. Real-world use of the test is likely to lead to a change in treatment in a significant portion of tested patients, particularly by shifting patients towards more conservative management. This could reduce overtreatment of patients with less aggressive disease, decreasing patient morbidity and costs for payers and the healthcare system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24320750     DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2013.873398

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin        ISSN: 0300-7995            Impact factor:   2.580


  11 in total

Review 1.  Genomic testing for localized prostate cancer: where do we go from here?

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Ashley E Ross
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.309

Review 2.  Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: Use, Outcomes, Imaging, and Diagnostic Tools.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tosoian; Stacy Loeb; Jonathan I Epstein; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Edward M Schaeffer
Journal:  Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book       Date:  2016

Review 3.  High-risk prostate cancer-classification and therapy.

Authors:  Albert J Chang; Karen A Autio; Mack Roach; Howard I Scher
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 66.675

4.  Evaluation of a 24-gene signature for prognosis of metastatic events and prostate cancer-specific mortality.

Authors:  Kathryn L Pellegrini; Martin G Sanda; Dattatraya Patil; Qi Long; María Santiago-Jiménez; Mandeep Takhar; Nicholas Erho; Kasra Yousefi; Elai Davicioni; Eric A Klein; Robert B Jenkins; R Jeffrey Karnes; Carlos S Moreno
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2017-02-11       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 5.  Which, when and why? Rational use of tissue-based molecular testing in localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A E Ross; A V D'Amico; S J Freedland
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 5.554

6.  Is There a Future for Chemoprevention of Prostate Cancer?

Authors:  Maarten C Bosland
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2016-04-20

Review 7.  Clinical Utility of Biomarkers in Localized Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Michael S Leapman; Hao G Nguyen; Matthew R Cooperberg
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 8.  Novel insights in cell cycle dysregulation during prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Salma Ben-Salem; Varadha Balaji Venkadakrishnan; Hannelore V Heemers
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 5.900

9.  Can contemporary patients with biopsy Gleason score 3+4 be eligible for active surveillance?

Authors:  Ohseong Kwon; Tae Jin Kim; In Jae Lee; Seok-Soo Byun; Sang Eun Lee; Sung Kyu Hong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Applying precision medicine to the active surveillance of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Chad A Reichard; Andrew J Stephenson; Eric A Klein
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.