| Literature DB >> 32978525 |
Roman Nawroth1, Matthias M Heck2, Lukas Lunger1, Margitta Retz1, Miriam Bandur1, Marc Souchay1, Elisabeth Vitzthum1, Marion Jäger1, Gregor Weirich3, Tibor Schuster4, Michael Autenrieth1, Hubert Kübler1,5, Tobias Maurer1,6, Mark Thalgott1, Kathleen Herkommer1, Florestan Koll1, Jürgen E Gschwend1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lymph-node (LN) metastasis in prostate cancer (PC) is a main risk factor for tumor recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP). Molecular analysis facilitates detection of small-volume LN metastases with higher sensitivity than histopathology. We aimed to prospectively evaluate six candidate gene markers for detection of pelvic LN metastases and to determine their ability to predict biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) in patients treated with RP.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32978525 PMCID: PMC8134043 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-020-00283-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis ISSN: 1365-7852 Impact factor: 5.554
Patient and lymph-node stratification by molecular marker expression in lymph nodes.
| Molecular analysis | Molecular and histopathologic analysis | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Target | Stratification by | molN0 | molN1 | molN0/pN0 | molN0/pN1 | molN1/pN0 | molN1/pN1 |
| KLK2a | Pat. | 56 (50.5) | 55 (49.5) | 56 (50.5) | 0 (0) | 27 (24.3) | 28 (25.2) |
| LN | 2197 (91.1) | 214 (8.9) | 2190 (90.8) | 7 (0.3) | 152 (6.3) | 62 (2.6) | |
| KLK3a | Pat. | 51 (45.9) | 60 (54.1) | 51 (45.9) | 0 (0) | 32 (28.8) | 28 (25.2) |
| LN | 2122 (88.0) | 289 (12.0) | 2116 (87.8) | 3 (0.1) | 223 (9.2) | 66 (2.7) | |
| KLK4a | Pat. | 54 (48.6) | 57 (51.4) | 52 (46.8) | 2 (1.8) | 31 (27.9) | 26 (23.4) |
| LN | 2221 (92.1) | 190 (7.9) | 2210 (91.7) | 11 (0.5) | 132 (5.5) | 58 (2.4) | |
| PSMAa | Pat. | 75 (67.6) | 36 (32.4) | 72 (64.9) | 3 (2.7) | 11 (9.9) | 25 (22.5) |
| LN | 2316 (96.1) | 95 (3.9) | 2300 (95.4) | 16 (0.7) | 42 (1.7) | 53 (2.2) | |
| TMPRSS2a | Pat. | 70 (63.1) | 41 (36.9) | 68 (61.3) | 2 (1.8) | 16 (14.4) | 25 (22.5) |
| LN | 2296 (95.2) | 115 (4.8) | 2283 (94.7) | 13 (0.5) | 59 (2.4) | 56 (2.3) | |
| TRPM8a | Pat. | 60 (54.1) | 51 (45.9) | 49 (44.1) | 2 (1.8) | 25 (22.5) | 26 (23.4) |
| LN | 2269 (94.1) | 142 (5.9) | 2256 (93.6) | 13 (0.5) | 86 (3.6) | 56 (2.3) | |
KLK2, KLK3, KLK4 Kallikrein 2, 3, and 4, PSMA prostate-specific membrane antigen, RP radical prostatectomy, TMPRSS2 transmembrane serine protease 2, TRPM8 transient receptor potential cation channel subfamily M member 8.
aThreshold calculated based on a gamma distribution to identify 99% of true histopathologic negative LNs with a 99% level of confidence.
bPercentages refer to percent of total.
(A) Cox proportional multivariable regression analysis for the association of histopathologic lymph-node status (pN1 vs. pN0) with dichotomous molecular marker expression in lymph nodes (molN0 vs. molN1) and established risk factors with bRFS. (B) Cox proportional multivariable regression analysis for the association of histopathologic lymph-node status (pN1 vs. pN0), continuous molecular marker expression in lymph nodes and established risk factors with bRFS.
| Variables | Category | Hazard ratio | 95% CI | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lymph-node status | pN1 vs. pN0 | 28 vs. 83 | 1.1 | 0.5–2.2 | 0.8 | |
| molN1 vs. molN0 | ||||||
| KLK2 | 55 vs. 56 | 0.3 | 0.0–1.6 | 0.15 | ||
| KLK3 | 60 vs. 51 | 4.0 | 1.1–15.2 | |||
| KLK4 | 57 vs. 54 | 1.4 | 0.4–4.6 | 0.6 | ||
| PSMA | 36 vs. 75 | 0.9 | 0.3–2.5 | 0.9 | ||
| TMPRSS2 | 41 vs. 70 | 5.1 | 1.4–19.0 | |||
| TRPM8 | 51 vs. 60 | 1.2 | 0.4–3.3 | 0.7 | ||
| Preoperative PSA level | Continuous (per 10 ng/ml increase) | 111 | 1.0 | 0.9–1.1 | 0.3 | |
| Tumor extension at RP | pT3 or pT4 vs. pT2 | 66 vs. 45 | 1.1 | 0.5–2.3 | 0.5 | |
| Gleason score at RP | 8, 9 or 10 vs. 6 or 7 | 37 vs. 74 | 0.8 | 0.4–1.5 | 0.5 | |
| Lymph-node status | pN1 vs. pN0 | 28 vs. 83 | 1.1 | 0.5–2.3 | 0.8 | |
| Molecular continuous marker expressiona | ||||||
| KLK2 | 111 | 1.4 | 0.8–2.5 | 0.3 | ||
| KLK3 | 111 | 1.1 | 0.7–2.0 | 0.6 | ||
| KLK4 | 111 | 0.8 | 0.4–1.7 | 0.5 | ||
| PSMA | 111 | 0.6 | 0.3–1.2 | 0.16 | ||
| TMPRSS2 | 111 | 2.3 | 1.0–5.2 | |||
| TRPM8 | 111 | 0.7 | 0.5–1.1 | 0.13 | ||
| Preoperative PSA level | Continuous (per 10 ng/ml increase) | 111 | 1.0 | 0.9–1.1 | 0.8 | |
| Tumor extension at RP | pT3 or pT4 vs. pT2 | 66 vs. 45 | 0.8 | 0.4–1.7 | 0.5 | |
| Gleason score at RP | 8, 9 or 10 vs. 6 or 7 | 37 vs. 74 | 1.0 | 0.6–1.9 | 0.9 | |
Cox proportional multivariable regression analysis for the association of lymph-node status and established risk factors with bRFS. Lymph-node status is stratified according to histopathology as well as (A) dichotomous or (B) continuous molecular marker expression in lymph nodes.
KLK2, KLK3, KLK4 Kallikrein 2, 3, and 4, PSMA prostate-specific membrane antigen, RP radical prostatectomy, TMPRSS2 transmembrane serine protease 2, TRPM8 transient receptor potential cation channel subfamily M member 8.
aMolecular continmarker expression = Log 10 (maximum marker expression in lymph nodes per patient + 1).
Bold values represent statistically significant results (p < 0.05).
Fig. 1Kaplan–Meier curves for biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) following radical prostatectomy according to histopathology or molecular lymph node analysis.
Patients with positive lymph nodes, both by histopathology (a, pN1 vs. pN0) or molecular lymph-node analysis using KLK3 (b, molN1 vs. molN0), and TMPRSS2 (c, molN1 vs. molN0) had a shorter biochemical recurrence-free survival. Pt Patients.
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier curves for biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) following radical prostatectomy according to the presence of lymph-node metastases detected by a combination of histopathology and molecular analysis.
For both KLK3 (a) and TMPRSS2 (b), median bRFS was significantly shorter in molN1/pN1-patients and molN0/pN1-patients as compared to molN0/pN0-patients, in whom median bRFS was not reached. Pt Patients.