Matthew R Cooperberg1, James D Brooks2, Anna V Faino3, Lisa F Newcomb4, James T Kearns5, Peter R Carroll6, Atreya Dash5, Ruth Etzioni3, Michael D Fabrizio7, Martin E Gleave8, Todd M Morgan9, Peter S Nelson10, Ian M Thompson11, Andrew A Wagner12, Daniel W Lin4, Yingye Zheng3. 1. Department of Urology, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. Electronic address: matthew.cooperberg@ucsf.edu. 2. Department of Urology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 3. Biostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA. 4. Cancer Prevention Program, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 6. Department of Urology, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. 7. Department of Urology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Virginia Beach, VA, USA. 8. Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 9. Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 10. Division of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA. 11. CHRISTUS Medical Center Hospital, San Antonio, TX, USA. 12. Division of Urology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For men on active surveillance for prostate cancer, utility of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics (PSAk) in predicting pathologic reclassification remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To develop prediction methods for utilizing serial PSA and evaluate frequency of collection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from men enrolled in the multicenter Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study, for whom PSA data were measured and biopsies performed on prespecified schedules. We developed a PSAk parameter based on a linear mixed-effect model (LMEM) that accounted for serial PSA levels. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association of diagnostic PSA and/or PSAk with time to reclassification (increase in cancer grade and/or volume) was evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 851 men met the study criteria; 255 (30%) had a reclassification event within 5 yr. Median follow-up was 3.7 yr. After adjusting for prostate size, time since diagnosis, biopsy parameters, and diagnostic PSA, PSAk was a significant predictor of reclassification (hazard ratio for each 0.10 increase in PSAk=1.6 [95% confidence interval 1.2-2.1, p<0.001]). The PSAk model improved stratification of risk prediction for the top and bottom deciles of risk over a model without PSAk. Model performance was essentially identical using PSA data measured every 6 mo to those measured every 3 mo. The major limitation is the reliability of reclassification as an end point, although it drives most treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: PSAk calculated using an LMEM statistically significantly predicts biopsy reclassification. Models that use repeat PSA measurements outperform a model incorporating only diagnostic PSA. Model performance is similar using PSA assessed every 3 or 6 mo. If validated, these results should inform optimal incorporation of PSA trends into active surveillance protocols and risk calculators. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at whether repeat prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, or PSA kinetics, improve prediction of biopsy outcomes in men using active surveillance to manage localized prostate cancer. We found that in a large multicenter active surveillance cohort, PSA kinetics improves the prediction of surveillance biopsy outcome.
BACKGROUND: For men on active surveillance for prostate cancer, utility of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics (PSAk) in predicting pathologic reclassification remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To develop prediction methods for utilizing serial PSA and evaluate frequency of collection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from men enrolled in the multicenter Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study, for whom PSA data were measured and biopsies performed on prespecified schedules. We developed a PSAk parameter based on a linear mixed-effect model (LMEM) that accounted for serial PSA levels. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association of diagnostic PSA and/or PSAk with time to reclassification (increase in cancer grade and/or volume) was evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 851 men met the study criteria; 255 (30%) had a reclassification event within 5 yr. Median follow-up was 3.7 yr. After adjusting for prostate size, time since diagnosis, biopsy parameters, and diagnostic PSA, PSAk was a significant predictor of reclassification (hazard ratio for each 0.10 increase in PSAk=1.6 [95% confidence interval 1.2-2.1, p<0.001]). The PSAk model improved stratification of risk prediction for the top and bottom deciles of risk over a model without PSAk. Model performance was essentially identical using PSA data measured every 6 mo to those measured every 3 mo. The major limitation is the reliability of reclassification as an end point, although it drives most treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: PSAk calculated using an LMEM statistically significantly predicts biopsy reclassification. Models that use repeat PSA measurements outperform a model incorporating only diagnostic PSA. Model performance is similar using PSA assessed every 3 or 6 mo. If validated, these results should inform optimal incorporation of PSA trends into active surveillance protocols and risk calculators. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at whether repeat prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurements, or PSA kinetics, improve prediction of biopsy outcomes in men using active surveillance to manage localized prostate cancer. We found that in a large multicenter active surveillance cohort, PSA kinetics improves the prediction of surveillance biopsy outcome.
Authors: Ashley E Ross; Stacy Loeb; Patricia Landis; Alan W Partin; Jonathan I Epstein; Anna Kettermann; Zhaoyong Feng; H Ballentine Carter; Patrick C Walsh Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-05-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Leonard P Bokhorst; Riccardo Valdagni; Antti Rannikko; Yoshiyuki Kakehi; Tom Pickles; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-06-19 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Andrew J Vickers; Cathee Till; Catherine M Tangen; Hans Lilja; Ian M Thompson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Matthew R Cooperberg; David J Pasta; Eric P Elkin; Mark S Litwin; David M Latini; Janeen Du Chane; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Luigi Ferrucci; Anna Kettermann; Patricia Landis; E James Wright; Jonathan I Epstein; Bruce J Trock; E Jeffrey Metter Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Stanley Ip; Issa J Dahabreh; Mei Chung; Winifred W Yu; Ethan M Balk; Ramon C Iovin; Paul Mathew; Tony Luongo; Tomas Dvorak; Joseph Lau Journal: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) Date: 2011-12
Authors: Ronald C Chen; R Bryan Rumble; D Andrew Loblaw; Antonio Finelli; Behfar Ehdaie; Matthew R Cooperberg; Scott C Morgan; Scott Tyldesley; John J Haluschak; Winston Tan; Stewart Justman; Suneil Jain Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Howard I Scher; Susan Halabi; Ian Tannock; Michael Morris; Cora N Sternberg; Michael A Carducci; Mario A Eisenberger; Celestia Higano; Glenn J Bubley; Robert Dreicer; Daniel Petrylak; Philip Kantoff; Ethan Basch; William Kevin Kelly; William D Figg; Eric J Small; Tomasz M Beer; George Wilding; Alison Martin; Maha Hussain Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Peter S Kirk; Kehao Zhu; Yingye Zheng; Lisa F Newcomb; Jeannette M Schenk; James D Brooks; Peter R Carroll; Atreya Dash; William J Ellis; Christopher P Filson; Martin E Gleave; Michael Liss; Frances Martin; Jesse K McKenney; Todd M Morgan; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Andrew A Wagner; Daniel W Lin; John L Gore Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Tyler J Nelson; Juan Javier-DesLoges; Rishi Deka; P Travis Courtney; Vinit Nalawade; Loren Mell; James Murphy; J Kellogg Parsons; Brent S Rose Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-05-03
Authors: Yu Jiang; Travis J Meyers; Adaeze A Emeka; Lauren Folgosa Cooley; Phillip R Cooper; Nicola Lancki; Irene Helenowski; Linda Kachuri; Daniel W Lin; Janet L Stanford; Lisa F Newcomb; Suzanne Kolb; Antonio Finelli; Neil E Fleshner; Maria Komisarenko; James A Eastham; Behfar Ehdaie; Nicole Benfante; Christopher J Logothetis; Justin R Gregg; Cherie A Perez; Sergio Garza; Jeri Kim; Leonard S Marks; Merdie Delfin; Danielle Barsa; Danny Vesprini; Laurence H Klotz; Andrew Loblaw; Alexandre Mamedov; S Larry Goldenberg; Celestia S Higano; Maria Spillane; Eugenia Wu; H Ballentine Carter; Christian P Pavlovich; Mufaddal Mamawala; Tricia Landis; Peter R Carroll; June M Chan; Matthew R Cooperberg; Janet E Cowan; Todd M Morgan; Javed Siddiqui; Rabia Martin; Eric A Klein; Karen Brittain; Paige Gotwald; Daniel A Barocas; Jeremiah R Dallmer; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Pam Steele; Shilajit D Kundu; Jazmine Stockdale; Monique J Roobol; Lionne D F Venderbos; Martin G Sanda; Rebecca Arnold; Dattatraya Patil; Christopher P Evans; Marc A Dall'Era; Anjali Vij; Anthony J Costello; Ken Chow; Niall M Corcoran; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Courtney Phares; Douglas S Scherr; Thomas Flynn; R Jeffrey Karnes; Michael Koch; Courtney Rose Dhondt; Joel B Nelson; Dawn McBride; Michael S Cookson; Kelly L Stratton; Stephen Farriester; Erin Hemken; Walter M Stadler; Tuula Pera; Deimante Banionyte; Fernando J Bianco; Isabel H Lopez; Stacy Loeb; Samir S Taneja; Nataliya Byrne; Christopher L Amling; Ann Martinez; Luc Boileau; Franklin D Gaylis; Jacqueline Petkewicz; Nicholas Kirwen; Brian T Helfand; Jianfeng Xu; Denise M Scholtens; William J Catalona; John S Witte Journal: HGG Adv Date: 2021-11-19
Authors: Daniel W Lin; Yingye Zheng; Jesse K McKenney; Marshall D Brown; Ruixiao Lu; Michael Crager; Hilary Boyer; Maria Tretiakova; James D Brooks; Atreya Dash; Michael D Fabrizio; Martin E Gleave; Suzanne Kolb; Michael Liss; Todd M Morgan; Ian M Thompson; Andrew A Wagner; Athanasios Tsiatis; Andrea Pingitore; Peter S Nelson; Lisa F Newcomb Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Matthew R Cooperberg; Yingye Zheng; Anna V Faino; Lisa F Newcomb; Kehao Zhu; Janet E Cowan; James D Brooks; Atreya Dash; Martin E Gleave; Frances Martin; Todd M Morgan; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Andrew A Wagner; Peter R Carroll; Daniel W Lin Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Belén Pastor-Navarro; José Rubio-Briones; Ángel Borque-Fernando; Luis M Esteban; Jose Luis Dominguez-Escrig; José Antonio López-Guerrero Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-06-10 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Sacheth Chandramouli; Patrick Leo; George Lee; Robin Elliott; Christine Davis; Guangjing Zhu; Pingfu Fu; Jonathan I Epstein; Robert Veltri; Anant Madabhushi Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-09-21 Impact factor: 6.639