Scott E Eggener1, R Bryan Rumble2, Andrew J Armstrong3, Todd M Morgan4, Tony Crispino5, Philip Cornford6, Theodorus van der Kwast7, David J Grignon8, Alex J Rai9, Neeraj Agarwal10, Eric A Klein11, Robert B Den12, Himisha Beltran13. 1. University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL. 2. American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA. 3. Duke University, Durham, NC. 4. University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI. 5. Las Vegas, NV. 6. Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom. 7. Princess Margaret Cancer Center, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 8. Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN. 9. Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY. 10. University of Utah Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT. 11. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. 12. Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. 13. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This guideline provides recommendations for available tissue-based prostate cancer biomarkers geared toward patient selection for active surveillance, identification of clinically significant disease, choice of postprostatectomy adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy, and to address emerging questions such as the relative value of tissue biomarkers compared with magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: An ASCO multidisciplinary Expert Panel, with representatives from the European Association of Urology, American Urological Association, and the College of American Pathologists, conducted a systematic literature review of localized prostate cancer biomarker studies between January 2013 and January 2019. Numerous tissue-based molecular biomarkers were evaluated for their prognostic capabilities and potential for improving management decisions. Here, the Panel makes recommendations regarding the clinical use and indications of these biomarkers. RESULTS: Of 555 studies identified, 77 were selected for inclusion plus 32 additional references selected by the Expert Panel. Few biomarkers had rigorous testing involving multiple cohorts and only 5 of these tests are commercially available currently: Oncotype Dx Prostate, Prolaris, Decipher, Decipher PORTOS, and ProMark. With various degrees of value and validation, multiple biomarkers have been shown to refine risk stratification and can be considered for select men to improve management decisions. There is a paucity of prospective studies assessing short- and long-term outcomes of patients when these markers are integrated into clinical decision making. RECOMMENDATIONS: Tissue-based molecular biomarkers (evaluating the sample with the highest volume of the highest Gleason pattern) may improve risk stratification when added to standard clinical parameters, but the Expert Panel endorses their use only in situations in which the assay results, when considered as a whole with routine clinical factors, are likely to affect a clinical decision. These assays are not recommended for routine use as they have not been prospectively tested or shown to improve long-term outcomes-for example, quality of life, need for treatment, or survival. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.
PURPOSE: This guideline provides recommendations for available tissue-based prostate cancer biomarkers geared toward patient selection for active surveillance, identification of clinically significant disease, choice of postprostatectomy adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy, and to address emerging questions such as the relative value of tissue biomarkers compared with magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: An ASCO multidisciplinary Expert Panel, with representatives from the European Association of Urology, American Urological Association, and the College of American Pathologists, conducted a systematic literature review of localized prostate cancer biomarker studies between January 2013 and January 2019. Numerous tissue-based molecular biomarkers were evaluated for their prognostic capabilities and potential for improving management decisions. Here, the Panel makes recommendations regarding the clinical use and indications of these biomarkers. RESULTS: Of 555 studies identified, 77 were selected for inclusion plus 32 additional references selected by the Expert Panel. Few biomarkers had rigorous testing involving multiple cohorts and only 5 of these tests are commercially available currently: Oncotype Dx Prostate, Prolaris, Decipher, Decipher PORTOS, and ProMark. With various degrees of value and validation, multiple biomarkers have been shown to refine risk stratification and can be considered for select men to improve management decisions. There is a paucity of prospective studies assessing short- and long-term outcomes of patients when these markers are integrated into clinical decision making. RECOMMENDATIONS: Tissue-based molecular biomarkers (evaluating the sample with the highest volume of the highest Gleason pattern) may improve risk stratification when added to standard clinical parameters, but the Expert Panel endorses their use only in situations in which the assay results, when considered as a whole with routine clinical factors, are likely to affect a clinical decision. These assays are not recommended for routine use as they have not been prospectively tested or shown to improve long-term outcomes-for example, quality of life, need for treatment, or survival. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.
Authors: Spyridon P Basourakos; Roman Gulati; Randy A Vince; Daniel E Spratt; Patrick J Lewicki; Alexander Hill; Yaw A Nyame; Jennifer Cullen; Sarah C Markt; Christopher E Barbieri; Jim C Hu; Erika Trapl; Jonathan E Shoag Journal: NEJM Evid Date: 2022-05-15
Authors: Hari T Vigneswaran; Luke Mittelstaedt; Alessio Crippa; Martin Eklund; Adriana Vidal; Stephen J Freedland; Michael R Abern Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Ha T N Nguyen; Haoliang Xue; Virginie Firlej; Yann Ponty; Melina Gallopin; Daniel Gautheret Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Irene Casanova-Salas; Alejandro Athie; Paul C Boutros; Marzia Del Re; David T Miyamoto; Kenneth J Pienta; Edwin M Posadas; Adam G Sowalsky; Arnulf Stenzl; Alexander W Wyatt; Joaquin Mateo Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 24.267
Authors: Joaquin Mateo; Rana McKay; Wassim Abida; Rahul Aggarwal; Joshi Alumkal; Ajjai Alva; Felix Feng; Xin Gao; Julie Graff; Maha Hussain; Fatima Karzai; Bruce Montgomery; William Oh; Vaibhav Patel; Dana Rathkopf; Matthew Rettig; Nikolaus Schultz; Matthew Smith; David Solit; Cora Sternberg; Eliezer Van Allen; David VanderWeele; Jake Vinson; Howard R Soule; Arul Chinnaiyan; Eric Small; Jonathan W Simons; William Dahut; Andrea K Miyahira; Himisha Beltran Journal: Nat Cancer Date: 2020-11-17