Literature DB >> 28494073

Associations of Luminal and Basal Subtyping of Prostate Cancer With Prognosis and Response to Androgen Deprivation Therapy.

Shuang G Zhao1, S Laura Chang1, Nicholas Erho2, Menggang Yu3, Jonathan Lehrer2, Mohammed Alshalalfa2, Corey Speers1, Matthew R Cooperberg4, Won Kim5, Charles J Ryan5, Robert B Den6, Stephen J Freedland7, Edwin Posadas8, Howard Sandler9, Eric A Klein10, Peter Black11, Roland Seiler11, Scott A Tomlins12,13, Arul M Chinnaiyan12,13,14,15, Robert B Jenkins16, Elai Davicioni2, Ashley E Ross17, Edward M Schaeffer18, Paul L Nguyen19, Peter R Carroll4, R Jeffrey Karnes16, Daniel E Spratt1, Felix Y Feng1,4,5,13,20.   

Abstract

Importance: There is a clear need for a molecular subtyping approach in prostate cancer to identify clinically distinct subgroups that benefit from specific therapies.
Objectives: To identify prostate cancer subtypes based on luminal and basal lineage and to determine associations with clinical outcomes and response to treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PAM50 classifier was used to subtype 1567 retrospectively collected (median follow-up, 10 years) and 2215 prospectively collected prostate cancer samples into luminal- and basal-like subtypes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Metastasis, biochemical recurrence, overall survival, prostate cancer–specific survival, associations with biological pathways, and clinicopathologic variables were the main outcomes.
Results: Among the 3782 samples, the PAM50 classifier consistently segregated prostate cancer into 3 subtypes in both the retrospective and prospective cohorts: luminal A (retrospective, 538 [34.3%]; prospective, 737 [33.3%]), luminal B (retrospective, 447 [28.5%]; prospective, 723 [32.6%]), and basal (retrospective, 582 [37.1%]; prospective, 755 [34.1%]). Known luminal lineage markers, such as NKX3.1 and KRT18, were enriched in luminal-like cancers, and the basal lineage CD49f signature was enriched in basal-like cancers, demonstrating the connection between these subtypes and established prostate cancer biology. In the retrospective cohort, luminal B prostate cancers exhibited the poorest clinical prognoses on both univariable and multivariable analyses accounting for standard clinicopathologic prognostic factors (10-year biochemical recurrence-free survival [bRFS], 29%; distant metastasis-free survival [DMFS], 53%; prostate cancer-specific survival [PCSS], 78%; overall survival [OS], 69%), followed by basal prostate cancers (10-year bRFS, 39%; DMFS, 73%; PCSS, 86%; OS, 80%) and luminal A prostate cancers (10-year bRFS, 41%; DMFS, 73%; PCSS, 89%; OS, 82%). Although both luminal-like subtypes were associated with increased androgen receptor expression and signaling, only luminal B prostate cancers were significantly associated with postoperative response to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in a subset analysis in our retrospective cohorts (n = 315) matching patients based on clinicopathologic variables (luminal B 10-year metastasis: treated, 33% vs untreated, 55%; nonluminal B 10-year metastasis: treated, 37% vs untreated, 21%; P = .006 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance: Luminal- and basal-like prostate cancers demonstrate divergent clinical behavior, and patients with luminal B tumors respond better to postoperative ADT than do patients with non–luminal B tumors. These findings contribute novel insight into prostate cancer biology, providing a potential clinical tool to personalize ADT treatment for prostate cancer by predicting which men may benefit from ADT after surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28494073      PMCID: PMC5824281          DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0751

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Oncol        ISSN: 2374-2437            Impact factor:   31.777


  45 in total

1.  Prostate cancer cell lines lack amplification: overexpression of HER2.

Authors:  Anders Ullén; Lena Lennartsson; Ulrika Harmenberg; Bo Lennernäs; Khairul Majumder; Anders R Holmberg; Sten Nilsson; Göran P Elmberger
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.089

2.  Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles.

Authors:  Aravind Subramanian; Pablo Tamayo; Vamsi K Mootha; Sayan Mukherjee; Benjamin L Ebert; Michael A Gillette; Amanda Paulovich; Scott L Pomeroy; Todd R Golub; Eric S Lander; Jill P Mesirov
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-09-30       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Tissue-based Genomics Augments Post-prostatectomy Risk Stratification in a Natural History Cohort of Intermediate- and High-Risk Men.

Authors:  Ashley E Ross; Michael H Johnson; Kasra Yousefi; Elai Davicioni; George J Netto; Luigi Marchionni; Helen L Fedor; Stephanie Glavaris; Voleak Choeurng; Christine Buerki; Nicholas Erho; Lucia L Lam; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Sheila Faraj; Stephania M Bezerra; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; Bruce J Trock; Edward M Schaeffer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-06-06       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Inherited variation in the androgen pathway is associated with the efficacy of androgen-deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Robert W Ross; William K Oh; Wanling Xie; Mark Pomerantz; Mari Nakabayashi; Oliver Sartor; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Meredith M Regan; Philip W Kantoff; Matthew Freedman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Validation of a genomic classifier that predicts metastasis following radical prostatectomy in an at risk patient population.

Authors:  R Jeffrey Karnes; Eric J Bergstralh; Elai Davicioni; Mercedeh Ghadessi; Christine Buerki; Anirban P Mitra; Anamaria Crisan; Nicholas Erho; Ismael A Vergara; Lucia L Lam; Rachel Carlson; Darby J S Thompson; Zaid Haddad; Benedikt Zimmermann; Thomas Sierocinski; Timothy J Triche; Thomas Kollmeyer; Karla V Ballman; Peter C Black; George G Klee; Robert B Jenkins
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-06-11       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Luminal cells are favored as the cell of origin for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Zhu A Wang; Roxanne Toivanen; Sarah K Bergren; Pierre Chambon; Michael M Shen
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 9.423

7.  Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes.

Authors:  Joel S Parker; Michael Mullins; Maggie C U Cheang; Samuel Leung; David Voduc; Tammi Vickery; Sherri Davies; Christiane Fauron; Xiaping He; Zhiyuan Hu; John F Quackenbush; Inge J Stijleman; Juan Palazzo; J S Marron; Andrew B Nobel; Elaine Mardis; Torsten O Nielsen; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou; Philip S Bernard
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-02-09       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Discovery and validation of a prostate cancer genomic classifier that predicts early metastasis following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Nicholas Erho; Anamaria Crisan; Ismael A Vergara; Anirban P Mitra; Mercedeh Ghadessi; Christine Buerki; Eric J Bergstralh; Thomas Kollmeyer; Stephanie Fink; Zaid Haddad; Benedikt Zimmermann; Thomas Sierocinski; Karla V Ballman; Timothy J Triche; Peter C Black; R Jeffrey Karnes; George Klee; Elai Davicioni; Robert B Jenkins
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Prognostic value of a cell cycle progression signature for prostate cancer death in a conservatively managed needle biopsy cohort.

Authors:  J Cuzick; D M Berney; G Fisher; D Mesher; H Møller; J E Reid; M Perry; J Park; A Younus; A Gutin; C S Foster; P Scardino; J S Lanchbury; S Stone
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Decipher correlation patterns post prostatectomy: initial experience from 2 342 prospective patients.

Authors:  R B Den; M Santiago-Jimenez; J Alter; M Schliekelman; J R Wagner; J F Renzulli Ii; D I Lee; C G Brito; K Monahan; B Gburek; N Kella; G Vallabhan; F Abdollah; E J Trabulsi; C D Lallas; L G Gomella; T L Woodlief; Z Haddad; L L C Lam; S Deheshi; Q Wang; V Choeurng; M du Plessis; J Jordan; B Parks; H Shin; C Buerki; K Yousefi; E Davicioni; V R Patel; N L Shah
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 5.554

View more
  97 in total

1.  Comparative analysis of 1152 African-American and European-American men with prostate cancer identifies distinct genomic and immunological differences.

Authors:  Walter Rayford; Alp Tuna Beksac; Jordan Alger; Mohammed Alshalalfa; Mohsen Ahmed; Irtaza Khan; Ugo G Falagario; Yang Liu; Elai Davicioni; Daniel E Spratt; Edward M Schaeffer; Felix Y Feng; Brandon Mahal; Paul L Nguyen; Robert B Den; Mark D Greenberger; Randy Bradley; Justin M Watson; Matthew Beamer; Lambros Stamatakis; Darrell J Carmen; Shivanshu Awasthi; Jonathan Hwang; Rachel Weil; Harri Merisaari; Nihal Mohamed; Leslie A Deane; Dimple Chakravarty; Kamlesh K Yadav; Kosj Yamoah; Sujit S Nair; Ashutosh K Tewari
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2021-06-03

Review 2.  Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Prostate Cancer Development: Therapeutic Implications.

Authors:  Ugo Testa; Germana Castelli; Elvira Pelosi
Journal:  Medicines (Basel)       Date:  2019-07-30

3.  Prostate cancer: Lineage predicts ADT response.

Authors:  Clemens Thoma
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 4.  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

5.  Xenograft-based, platform-independent gene signatures to predict response to alkylating chemotherapy, radiation, and combination therapy for glioblastoma.

Authors:  Shuang G Zhao; Menggang Yu; Daniel E Spratt; S Laura Chang; Felix Y Feng; Michelle M Kim; Corey W Speers; Brett L Carlson; Ann C Mladek; Theodore S Lawrence; Jann N Sarkaria; Daniel R Wahl
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 12.300

6.  Tumor subtype defines distinct pathways of molecular and clinical progression in primary prostate cancer.

Authors:  Deli Liu; Michael A Augello; Ivana Grbesa; Davide Prandi; Yang Liu; Jonathan E Shoag; R Jeffrey Karnes; Bruce J Trock; Eric A Klein; Robert B Den; Francesca Demichelis; Elai Davicioni; Andrea Sboner; Christopher E Barbieri
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 14.808

7.  Soluble CD105 is prognostic of disease recurrence in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Veronica R Placencio-Hickok; Anisha Madhav; Sungjin Kim; Frank Duong; Bryan Angara; Zhenqiu Liu; Neil A Bhowmick
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 5.678

8.  Single-cell analysis reveals transcriptomic remodellings in distinct cell types that contribute to human prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Sujun Chen; Guanghui Zhu; Yue Yang; Fubo Wang; Yu-Tian Xiao; Na Zhang; Xiaojie Bian; Yasheng Zhu; Yongwei Yu; Fei Liu; Keqin Dong; Javier Mariscal; Yin Liu; Fraser Soares; Helen Loo Yau; Bo Zhang; Weidong Chen; Chao Wang; Dai Chen; Qinghua Guo; Zhengfang Yi; Mingyao Liu; Michael Fraser; Daniel D De Carvalho; Paul C Boutros; Dolores Di Vizio; Zhou Jiang; Theodorus van der Kwast; Alejandro Berlin; Song Wu; Jianhua Wang; Housheng Hansen He; Shancheng Ren
Journal:  Nat Cell Biol       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 28.824

9.  Three-month Prostate-specific Antigen Level After Androgen Deprivation Therapy Predicts Survival in Patients With Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Naohiro Fujimoto; Masaki Shiota; Takuo Matsukawa; Akinori Minato; Ikko Tomisaki; Rei Ohnishi; Masatoshi Eto
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

10.  Harnessing Population Pedigree Data and Machine Learning Methods to Identify Patterns of Familial Bladder Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Heidi A Hanson; Claire L Leiser; Brock O'Neil; Christopher Martin; Sumati Gupta; Ken R Smith; Christopher Dechet; William T Lowrance; Michael J Madsen; Nicola J Camp
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.