Kasper Drimer Berg1, Ben Vainer2, Frederik Birkebæk Thomsen3, M Andreas Røder3, Thomas Alexander Gerds4, Birgitte Grønkær Toft2, Klaus Brasso3, Peter Iversen3. 1. Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. Electronic address: kasperdrimerberg@gmail.com. 2. Department of Pathology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Department of Urology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Compelling biomarkers identifying prostate cancer patients with a high risk of progression during active surveillance (AS) are needed. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between ERG expression at diagnosis and the risk of progression during AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included 265 patients followed on AS with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, clinical examinations, and 10-12 core rebiopsies from 2002 to 2012 in a prospectively maintained database. ERG immunohistochemical staining was performed on diagnostic paraffin-embedded formalin-fixed sections with a ready-to-use kit (anti-ERG, EPR3864). Men were characterised as ERG positive if a minimum of one tumour focus demonstrated ERG expression. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall AS progression was defined as clinical progression: increased clinical tumour category ≥cT2b by digital rectal examination and ultrasound, and/or histopathologic progression: upgrade of Gleason score, more than three positive cores or bilateral positive cores, and/or PSA progression: PSA doubling time <3 yr. Risk of progression was analysed using multiple cause-specific Cox regression and stratified cumulative incidences (Aalen-Johansen method). Curatively intended treatment, watchful waiting, and death without progression were treated as competing events. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 121 of 142 ERG-negative and 96 of 123 ERG-positive patients had complete diagnostic information. In competing risk models, the ERG-positive group showed significantly higher incidences of overall AS progression (p<0.0001) and of the subgroups PSA progression (p<0.0001) and histopathologic progression (p<0.0001). The 2-yr cumulative incidence of overall AS progression was 21.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.3-29.1) in the ERG-negative group compared with 58.6% (95% CI, 48.7-68.5) in the ERG-positive group. ERG positivity was a significant predictor of overall AS progression in multiple Cox regression (hazard ratio: 2.45; 95% CI, 1.62-3.72; p<0.0001). The main limitation of this study is its observational nature. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, ERG positivity at diagnosis can be used to estimate the risk of progression during AS. If confirmed, ERG status can be used to individualise AS programmes. PATIENT SUMMARY: The tissue biomarker ERG identifies active surveillance patients with an increased risk of disease progression.
BACKGROUND: Compelling biomarkers identifying prostate cancerpatients with a high risk of progression during active surveillance (AS) are needed. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between ERG expression at diagnosis and the risk of progression during AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included 265 patients followed on AS with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, clinical examinations, and 10-12 core rebiopsies from 2002 to 2012 in a prospectively maintained database. ERG immunohistochemical staining was performed on diagnostic paraffin-embedded formalin-fixed sections with a ready-to-use kit (anti-ERG, EPR3864). Men were characterised as ERG positive if a minimum of one tumour focus demonstrated ERG expression. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall AS progression was defined as clinical progression: increased clinical tumour category ≥cT2b by digital rectal examination and ultrasound, and/or histopathologic progression: upgrade of Gleason score, more than three positive cores or bilateral positive cores, and/or PSA progression: PSA doubling time <3 yr. Risk of progression was analysed using multiple cause-specific Cox regression and stratified cumulative incidences (Aalen-Johansen method). Curatively intended treatment, watchful waiting, and death without progression were treated as competing events. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 121 of 142 ERG-negative and 96 of 123 ERG-positive patients had complete diagnostic information. In competing risk models, the ERG-positive group showed significantly higher incidences of overall AS progression (p<0.0001) and of the subgroups PSA progression (p<0.0001) and histopathologic progression (p<0.0001). The 2-yr cumulative incidence of overall AS progression was 21.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.3-29.1) in the ERG-negative group compared with 58.6% (95% CI, 48.7-68.5) in the ERG-positive group. ERG positivity was a significant predictor of overall AS progression in multiple Cox regression (hazard ratio: 2.45; 95% CI, 1.62-3.72; p<0.0001). The main limitation of this study is its observational nature. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, ERG positivity at diagnosis can be used to estimate the risk of progression during AS. If confirmed, ERG status can be used to individualise AS programmes. PATIENT SUMMARY: The tissue biomarker ERG identifies active surveillance patients with an increased risk of disease progression.
Authors: Stacy Loeb; Sophie M Bruinsma; Joseph Nicholson; Alberto Briganti; Tom Pickles; Yoshiyuki Kakehi; Sigrid V Carlsson; Monique J Roobol Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Alba Torres; Mohammed Alshalalfa; Scott A Tomlins; Nicholas Erho; Ewan A Gibb; Jijumon Chelliserry; Lony Lim; Lucia L C Lam; Sheila F Faraj; Stephania M Bezerra; Elai Davicioni; Kasra Yousefi; Ashley E Ross; George J Netto; Edward M Schaeffer; Tamara L Lotan Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2017-03-21 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: D Lee; J Fontugne; N Gumpeni; K Park; T Y MacDonald; B D Robinson; A Sboner; M A Rubin; J M Mosquera; C E Barbieri Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Guan Hee Tan; Antonio Finelli; Ardalan Ahmad; Marian S Wettstein; Thenappan Chandrasekar; Alexandre R Zlotta; Neil E Fleshner; Robert J Hamilton; Girish S Kulkarni; Khaled Ajib; Gregory Nason; Nathan Perlis Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2019-08-31 Impact factor: 1.862