INTRODUCTION: Active surveillance (AS) is standard of care in low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). This study describes a novel total cancer location (TCLo) density metric and aims to determine its performance in predicting clinical progression (CP) and grade progression (GP). METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients on AS after confirmatory biopsy (CBx). We excluded patients with Gleason ≥7 at CBx and <2 years followup. TCLo was the number of locations with positive cores at diagnosis (DBx) and CBx. TCLo density was TCLo/prostate volume (PV). CP was progression to any active treatment while GP occurred if Gleason ≥7 was identified on repeat biopsy or surgical pathology. Independent predictors of time to CP or GP were estimated with Cox regression. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared progression-free survival (PFS) curves between TCLo density groups. Test characteristics of TCLo density were explored with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: We included 181 patients who had CBx from 2012-2015 and met inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients was 62.58 years (standard deviation [SD] 7.13) and median followup was 60.9 months (interquartile range [IQR] 23.4). A high TCLo density score (>0.05) was independently associated with time to CP (hazard ratio [HR] 4.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.62-8.42; p<0.001) and GP (HR 3.85; 95% CI 1.91-7.73; p<0.001). ROC curves showed TCLo density has greater area under the curve than number of positive cores at CBx in predicting progression. CONCLUSIONS: TCLo density is able to stratify patients on AS for risk of CP and GP. With further validation, it could be added to the decision-making algorithm in AS for low-risk localized PCa.
INTRODUCTION: Active surveillance (AS) is standard of care in low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). This study describes a novel total cancer location (TCLo) density metric and aims to determine its performance in predicting clinical progression (CP) and grade progression (GP). METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients on AS after confirmatory biopsy (CBx). We excluded patients with Gleason ≥7 at CBx and <2 years followup. TCLo was the number of locations with positive cores at diagnosis (DBx) and CBx. TCLo density was TCLo/prostate volume (PV). CP was progression to any active treatment while GP occurred if Gleason ≥7 was identified on repeat biopsy or surgical pathology. Independent predictors of time to CP or GP were estimated with Cox regression. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared progression-free survival (PFS) curves between TCLo density groups. Test characteristics of TCLo density were explored with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: We included 181 patients who had CBx from 2012-2015 and met inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients was 62.58 years (standard deviation [SD] 7.13) and median followup was 60.9 months (interquartile range [IQR] 23.4). A high TCLo density score (>0.05) was independently associated with time to CP (hazard ratio [HR] 4.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.62-8.42; p<0.001) and GP (HR 3.85; 95% CI 1.91-7.73; p<0.001). ROC curves showed TCLo density has greater area under the curve than number of positive cores at CBx in predicting progression. CONCLUSIONS: TCLo density is able to stratify patients on AS for risk of CP and GP. With further validation, it could be added to the decision-making algorithm in AS for low-risk localized PCa.
Authors: Andrew M Erickson; Stefano Luzzago; Axel Semjonow; Hanna Vasarainen; Teemu D Laajala; Gennaro Musi; Ottavio de Cobelli; Tuomas Mirtti; Antti Rannikko Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2018-05-15
Authors: Kasper Drimer Berg; Ben Vainer; Frederik Birkebæk Thomsen; M Andreas Røder; Thomas Alexander Gerds; Birgitte Grønkær Toft; Klaus Brasso; Peter Iversen Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jared M Whitson; Sima P Porten; Joan F Hilton; Janet E Cowan; Nannette Perez; Matthew R Cooperberg; Kirsten L Greene; Maxwell V Meng; Jeff P Simko; Katsuto Shinohara; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-03-21 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ari Adamy; David S Yee; Kazuhito Matsushita; Alexandra Maschino; Angel Cronin; Andrew Vickers; Bertrand Guillonneau; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-12-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Bruce J Trock; Patricia Landis; Zhaoyong Feng; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; H Ballentine Carter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mark S Soloway; Cynthia T Soloway; Ahmed Eldefrawy; Kristell Acosta; Bruce Kava; Murugesan Manoharan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jeffrey J Tosoian; Stacy Loeb; Anna Kettermann; Patricia Landis; Debra J Elliot; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Lori J Sokoll Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-12-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ely R Felker; Jason Wu; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Steven S Raman; Jiaoti Huang; Fred Dorey; Leonard S Marks Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 7.450
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