Literature DB >> 30179620

Genomic Prostate Score, PI-RADS™ version 2 and Progression in Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.

Zachary Kornberg1, Janet E Cowan1, Antonio C Westphalen2, Matthew R Cooperberg1,3, June M Chan1,3, Shoujun Zhao1, Katsuto Shinohara1, Peter R Carroll1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The OncotypeDx® GPS (Genomic Prostate Score®) is a 17-gene RNA expression assay intended to help guide treatment decisions in men diagnosed with prostate cancer. The PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2 was developed to standardize the risk stratification of lesions identified on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging. We sought to determine whether these tests are associated with an increased risk of biopsy upgrading in men on active surveillance.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all patients on active surveillance at the University of California-San Francisco who had low/intermediate risk prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen 20 ng/ml or less and clinical stage T1/T2) and Gleason score 6 disease who underwent multiple biopsies and had a GPS available and/or had undergone multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging with an available PI-RADS version 2 score. The primary study outcome was biopsy upgrading, defined as an increase in the Gleason score from 3 + 3 to 3 + 4 or greater, which was analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression.
RESULTS: Of the men 140 had only GPS test findings, 169 had only a PI-RADS version 2 score and 131 had both data. Each 5-unit increase in the GPS was associated with an increased risk of biopsy upgrading (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.19-1.39, p <0.01). PI-RADS scores of 5 vs 1-2 (HR 4.38, 95% CI 2.36-8.16, p <0.01) and 4 vs 1-2 (HR 2.62, 95% CI 1.45-4.76, p <0.01) were also associated with an increased risk of a biopsy upgrade. On subanalysis of patients with GPS and PI-RADS version 2 scores the GPS was associated with biopsy upgrading, adding value to the clinical covariates (partial likelihood ratio p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: A higher GPS or a PI-RADS version 2 score of 4 or 5 was associated with an increased risk of biopsy upgrading.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30179620     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.08.047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  10 in total

1.  Serial prostate magnetic resonance imaging fails to predict pathological progression in patients on active surveillance.

Authors:  Danly Omil-Lima; Albert Kim; Ilon Weinstein; Karishma Gupta; David Sheyn; Lee Ponsky
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 2.052

Review 2.  The current role of MRI for guiding active surveillance in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Guillaume Ploussard; Olivier Rouvière; Morgan Rouprêt; Roderick van den Bergh; Raphaële Renard-Penna
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 16.430

Review 3.  How should radiologists incorporate non-imaging prostate cancer biomarkers into daily practice?

Authors:  Pawel Rajwa; Jamil Syed; Michael S Leapman
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-12

Review 4.  Defining and Measuring Adherence in Observational Studies Assessing Outcomes of Real-world Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Glenda Kith; Sarah Lisker; Urmimala Sarkar; Jill Barr-Walker; Benjamin N Breyer; Nynikka R Palmer
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-07-06

Review 5.  A review on the role of tissue-based molecular biomarkers for active surveillance.

Authors:  Sanoj Punnen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Grading Evolution and Contemporary Prognostic Biomarkers of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Konrad Sopyllo; Andrew M Erickson; Tuomas Mirtti
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 7.  The utility of prostate MRI within active surveillance: description of the evidence.

Authors:  Georgina Dominique; Wayne G Brisbane; Robert E Reiter
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Determining Clinically Based Factors Associated With Reclassification in the Pre-MRI Era using a Large Prospective Active Surveillance Cohort.

Authors:  Justin R Gregg; John W Davis; Chad Reichard; Xuemei Wang; Mary Achim; Brian F Chapin; Louis Pisters; Curtis Pettaway; John F Ward; Seungtaek Choi; Quynh-Nhu Nguyen; Deborah Kuban; Richard Babaian; Patricia Troncoso; Lydia T Madsen; Christopher Logothetis; Jeri Kim
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Test Results in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study (PASS) Cohort.

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

Review 10.  Genetic Landscape of Prostate Cancer Conspicuity on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Bioinformatic Analysis.

Authors:  Joseph M Norris; Benjamin S Simpson; Marina A Parry; Clare Allen; Rhys Ball; Alex Freeman; Daniel Kelly; Hyung L Kim; Alex Kirkham; Sungyong You; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Hayley C Whitaker; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2020-07
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.