Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
J Urol. 2018 Feb;199(2):438-444. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.09.077. Epub 2017 Sep 20.
We sought to determine whether disease volume at prostate biopsy would correlate with genomic scores among men with favorable risk prostate cancer.
We identified all men with NCCN® (National Comprehensive Cancer Network®) very low and low risk disease who underwent Oncotype DX® prostate testing at our institution from 2013 to 2016. Disease volume was characterized as the percent of positive cores, the number of cores with greater than 50% involvement, the largest involvement of any single core and prostate specific antigen density. Nonparametric testing was performed to compare the median Genomic Prostate Score™ and the likelihood of favorable pathology findings between quartiles of disease volume.
We identified 112 (37.8%) and 184 men (62.2%) at NCCN very low and low risk, respectively. Median scores did not differ significantly between disease volume quartiles (all p >0.05). However, the median likelihood of favorable pathology findings statistically differed between volume quartiles (all <0.05). Seven of the 105 men (6.3%) with very low risk disease were reclassified at low risk and 13 of 181 (7.2%) with low risk disease were reclassified at intermediate risk. Genomic disease reclassification did not depend on biopsy tumor volume.
In patients with NCCN very low and low risk prostate cancer genomic scores did not demonstrate meaningfully significant differences by volume based on clinically established cutoff points. Moreover, genomic scores identified and reclassified men with higher risk disease despite generally acceptable surveillance characteristics in this group according to grade and volume. This suggests that in patients at low risk the tumor biological potential measured by genomics rather than by volume should inform decisions on active surveillance candidacy.
我们旨在确定前列腺活检中的病变体积是否与具有有利风险前列腺癌的男性的基因组评分相关。
我们从 2013 年至 2016 年,在我院识别了所有接受 Oncotype DX®前列腺检测且 NCCN®(美国国家综合癌症网络®)分类为极低危和低危的男性。病变体积的特征为阳性核心的百分比、大于 50%受累的核心数、任何单个核心的最大受累程度和前列腺特异性抗原密度。使用非参数检验比较基因组前列腺评分的中位数和不同病变体积四分位数之间有利病理发现的可能性。
我们分别识别出 NCCN 极低危和低危组中的 112(37.8%)和 184 名男性(62.2%)。病变体积四分位数之间的中位数评分无显著差异(均 p>0.05)。然而,体积四分位数之间有利病理发现的中位数可能性存在统计学差异(均<0.05)。105 名极低危疾病男性中有 7 名(6.3%)重新分类为低危,181 名低危疾病男性中有 13 名(7.2%)重新分类为中危。基因组疾病重新分类与活检肿瘤体积无关。
在 NCCN 极低危和低危前列腺癌患者中,基于临床确定的临界值,基因组评分并未显示出有意义的显著差异。此外,基因组评分确定并重新分类了具有较高风险疾病的男性,尽管根据分级和体积,该组具有可接受的监测特征。这表明在低危患者中,肿瘤生物学潜力应由基因组而不是体积来衡量,这应影响主动监测候选资格的决策。