Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Urology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA.
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Jul;7(4):797-806. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.02.008. Epub 2020 Mar 7.
Over 20% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PC) are ≥75 yr old. More objective disease-specific indices for predicting outcomes beyond chronological age are necessary.
To analyze age-related differences in clinical-genomic prognostic features of aggressiveness in localized PC.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective multicenter cross-sectional study reported the use of the Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK) guidelines. Clinical-genomic data of patients who underwent a prostate biopsy or radical prostatectomy (RP) were obtained from the Decipher Genomic Resource Information Database (NCT02609269).
Our analyses focused on the 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (GC) and 50-gene (PAM50) models in the biopsy and RP cohorts stratified by age.
The primary endpoint was the impact of age on GC scores and PAM50 molecular subtypes. Prognostic indices including Decipher GC scores, PAM50 molecular subtypes, National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk categories, and ISUP grade groups (IGGs) were stratified by age using multivariable logistic regression analyses.
Within histological low-risk IGGs, there were a higher proportion of patients with high-risk Decipher biopsy scores with age (age <60 yr: 10.1% IGG 1 and 29.9% IGG 2 vs age ≥80 yr: 22% IGG 1 and 37.7% IGG 2). The prevalence of the adverse phenotype luminal B (PAM50-defined) increased with age (age <60 yr: 22.7% and 40.2% vs age ≥80 yr: 29.7% and 49.1%, in patients with IGG 1 and IGG 2, respectively). In IGGs 3-5, no age differences were observed. Multivariable models demonstrated that each age decile entailed a 19% (odds ratio [OR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.29, p < 0.001) and a 10% (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.05-1.16) increased probability for a high-risk Decipher biopsy and RP score, respectively. Aside from an obvious selection bias, data on race, family history, prostate volume, and long-term follow-up outcomes were unavailable.
These data demonstrated that elderly men with favorable pathology (IGG 1-2), might harbor more aggressive disease than younger patients based on validated GC scores.
The presented clinical-genomic data demonstrate that elderly patients with low-risk prostate cancer might harbor more aggressive disease than their younger counterparts. This suggests that standard well-accepted paradigm of elderly prostate cancer patients not being aggressively treated, based solely on their chronological age, might need to be reconsidered.
超过 20%被诊断患有前列腺癌(PC)的男性年龄≥75 岁。有必要寻找更客观的疾病特异性指标来预测年龄以外的预后。
分析年龄对局限性 PC 侵袭性的临床-基因组预后特征的影响。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项回顾性多中心横断面研究,报告了使用肿瘤标志物预后研究报告建议(REMARK)指南。从 Decipher 基因组资源信息数据库(NCT02609269)获得了接受前列腺活检或根治性前列腺切除术(RP)的患者的临床基因组数据。
我们的分析重点是在年龄分层的活检和 RP 队列中使用 22 基因 Decipher 基因组分类器(GC)和 50 基因(PAM50)模型。
主要终点是年龄对 GC 评分和 PAM50 分子亚型的影响。使用多变量逻辑回归分析,根据年龄对包括 Decipher GC 评分、PAM50 分子亚型、国家综合癌症网络风险类别和国际泌尿科病理学会分级组(IGG)在内的预后指数进行分层。
在组织学低危 IGG 中,随着年龄的增长,高风险 Decipher 活检评分的患者比例更高(年龄<60 岁:IGG1 为 10.1%,IGG2 为 29.9%;年龄≥80 岁:IGG1 为 22%,IGG2 为 37.7%)。不良表型 luminal B(PAM50 定义)的患病率随年龄增加而增加(年龄<60 岁:IGG1 和 IGG2 分别为 22.7%和 40.2%;年龄≥80 岁:IGG1 和 IGG2 分别为 29.7%和 49.1%)。在 IGG3-5 中,未观察到年龄差异。多变量模型表明,每 10 岁的年龄区间都会使高风险 Decipher 活检和 RP 评分的概率分别增加 19%(比值比[OR] 1.19,95%置信区间[CI] 1.10-1.29,p<0.001)和 10%(OR 1.1,95% CI 1.05-1.16)。除了明显的选择偏倚外,还缺乏有关种族、家族史、前列腺体积和长期随访结果的数据。
这些数据表明,在具有有利病理(IGG1-2)的老年男性中,基于经过验证的 GC 评分,他们可能比年轻患者具有更具侵袭性的疾病。
所提供的临床基因组数据表明,患有低危前列腺癌的老年患者可能比年轻患者具有更具侵袭性的疾病。这表明,基于患者的年龄而不是其生理年龄,不能积极治疗老年前列腺癌患者的这种传统观念可能需要重新考虑。