Faculty Bibliography

The use of active surveillance (AS) is increasing for favorable-risk prostate cancer. However, there remain challenges in patient selection for AS, due to the limitations of current clinical staging. In addition, monitoring protocols relying on serial biopsies is invasive and presents risks such as infection. For these reasons, there is substantial interest in identifying markers that can be used to improve AS selection and monitoring. In this article, we review the evidence on serum, urine and tissue markers in AS.

OBJECTIVE:To understand the informational needs during active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer from the perspectives of patients and providers. METHODS:We conducted seven focus groups with 37 AS patients in two urban clinical settings, and 24 semi-structured interviews with a national sample of providers. Transcripts were analyzed using applied thematic analysis, and themes were organized using descriptive matrix analyses. RESULTS:We identified six themes related to informational needs during AS: 1) more information on prostate cancer (biopsy features, prognosis), 2) more information on active surveillance (difference from watchful waiting, testing protocol), 3) more information on alternative management options (complementary medicine, lifestyle modification), 4) greater variety of resources (multiple formats, targeting different audiences), 5) more social support and interaction, and 6) verified integrity of information (trusted, multidisciplinary and secure). CONCLUSIONS:Patients and providers described numerous drawbacks to existing prostate cancer resources and a variety of unmet needs including information on prognosis, AS testing protocols, and lifestyle modification. They also expressed a need for different types of resources, including interaction and unbiased information. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:These results are useful to inform the design of future resources for men undergoing AS.

Purpose The association between exposure to testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) and prostate cancer risk is controversial. The objective was to examine this association through nationwide, population-based registry data. Methods We performed a nested case-control study in the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, which includes all 38,570 prostate cancer cases diagnosed from 2009 to 2012, and 192,838 age-matched men free of prostate cancer. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to examine associations between TRT and risk of prostate cancer (overall, favorable, and aggressive). Results Two hundred eighty-four patients with prostate cancer (1%) and 1,378 control cases (1%) filled prescriptions for TRT. In multivariable analysis, no association was found between TRT and overall prostate cancer risk (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.17). However, patients who received TRT had more favorable-risk prostate cancer (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.56) and a lower risk of aggressive prostate cancer (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.67). The increase in favorable-risk prostate cancer was already observed within the first year of TRT (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.34), whereas the lower risk of aggressive disease was observed after > 1 year of TRT (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.61). After adjusting for previous biopsy findings as an indicator of diagnostic activity, TRT remained significantly associated with more favorable-risk prostate cancer and lower risk of aggressive prostate cancer. Conclusion The early increase in favorable-risk prostate cancer among patients who received TRT suggests a detection bias, whereas the decrease in risk of aggressive prostate cancer is a novel finding that warrants further investigation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:This article intends to review biomarkers derived from blood, urine, and tissue that can aid in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:PCa screening requires tools that complement prostate-specific antigen (PSA) with a higher specificity for clinically significant disease. Novel blood biomarkers, such as the Prostate Health Index (phi) and 4Kscore, utilize isoforms of PSA to more accurately predict high-grade PCa than traditional tools such as PSA and the percentage free-to-total PSA. Several gene products associated with PCa can be detected in the urine through commercially available assays. PCa antigen 3 (PCA3), though approved for repeat biopsy decisions, appears inferior to other biomarkers such as phi for identifying aggressive disease. However, combinations of PCA3 with other urine assays have shown promising results. One tissue-based hypermethylation test, named ConfirmMDx, can also be used to determine the need for repeat biopsy in men with a prior negative biopsy. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:Several biomarkers have been developed to aid in the screening and diagnosis of PCa. Such tests are often indicated in men with moderately elevated PSA or history of a prior negative biopsy. Their use facilitates reduction of unnecessary biopsies without sacrificing the early diagnosis of clinically significant PCa.

This article describes markers used for prostate biopsy decisions, including prostrate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA, the prostate health index, 4Kscore, PCA3, and ConfirmMDx. It also summarizes the use of nomograms combining multiple variables for prostate cancer detection.

BACKGROUND:While the optimal use and timing of secondary therapy after radical prostatectomy (RP) remain controversial, there are limited data on patient-reported outcomes following multimodal therapy. OBJECTIVE:To assess the impact of additional radiation therapy (RT) and/or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on urinary continence, potency, and quality of life (QoL) after RP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Among 13150 men who underwent RP from 1992 to 2013, 905 received RP + RT, 407 RP + ADT and 688 RP + RT + ADT. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES:Urinary function, sexual function, and overall QoL were evaluated annually using self-administered validated questionnaires. Propensity score-matched and bootstrap analyses were performed, and the distributions for all functional outcomes were analyzed as a function of time after RP. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:Patients who received RP + RT had a 4% higher overall incontinence rate 3 yr after surgery, and 1% higher rate for severe incontinence (>3 pads/24h) compared to matched RP-only patients. ADT further increased the overall and severe incontinence rates by 4% and 3%, respectively, compared to matched RP + RT patients. RP + RT was associated with an 18% lower rate of potency compared to RP alone, while RP + RT + ADT was associated with a further 17% reduction compared to RP + RT. Additional RT reduced QoL by 10% and additional ADT by a further 12% compared to RP only and RP + RT, respectively. The timing of RT after RP had no influence on continence, but adjuvant compared to salvage RT was associated with significantly lower potency (37% vs 45%), but higher QoL (60% vs 56%). Limitations of our study include the observational study design and potential for selection bias in the treatments received. CONCLUSIONS:Secondary RT and ADT after RP have an additive negative influence on urinary function, potency, and QoL. Patients with high-risk disease should be counseled before RP on the potential net impairment of functional outcomes due to multimodal treatment. PATIENT SUMMARY:Men with high-risk disease choosing surgery upfront should be counseled on the potential need for additional radiation and or androgen deprivation, and the potential net impairment of functional outcomes arising from multimodal treatment.