Search

Background The initial report from the ASIST trial showed little benefit from targeted biopsy for men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. Data after 2-yr follow-up are now available for analysis. Objective To determine if there was a difference in the AS failure rate in a 2-yr follow-up period among men undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before initial confirmatory biopsy (CBx) compared to those who did not. Design, setting, and participants This is the 2-yr post-CBx follow-up for the ASIST trial, a prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label study for men with Gleason grade group (GG) 1 cancer eligible for AS. Patients were randomized to CBx with 12-core systematic sampling or MRI with systematic and targeted sampling. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Patients with GG ≤ 1 on CBx were followed for 2 yr and had MRI and biopsy at that time point. Patients failed AS if they were no longer under AS because of grade progression, clinical progression, subject choice, clinical judgment, treatment, or lost to follow-up. Clinically significant cancer (CSC) was defined as GG ≥ 2. Results and limitations In total, 259 men underwent CBx, 132 in the non-MRI and 127 in the MRI arm. After biopsy, 101 men in the non-MRI arm (76%) and 98 in the MRI arm (77%) continued AS. There were fewer men with AS failures in the MRI (19/98, 19%) compared to the non-MRI group (35/101, 35%; p = 0.017). At 2-yr biopsy there were fewer men with CSC in the MRI arm (9.9%, 8/81) than in the non-MRI arm (23%, 17/75; p = 0.048). Significant differences in AS failure rates were detected across the three centers in the MRI arm only (4.2% [2/48] vs 17% [4/24] vs 27% [7/26]; p = 0.019). Conclusions Baseline MRI before CBx during AS results in 50% fewer AS failures and less grade progression over 2 yr. The center where MRI and targeted biopsy is performed may influence AS failure rates. Patient summary The ASIST trial randomized 273 men on active surveillance with low-grade prostate cancer diagnosed within the last year to systematic biopsy or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with systematic and targeted biopsy. The initial report showed little benefit from targeted biopsy. However, after 2 yr of follow-up we found that baseline MRI before confirmatory biopsy resulted in 50% fewer failures of surveillance and less progression to higher-grade cancer. This confirms the value of MRI in men on surveillance. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01354171).

Within the Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) initiative, 25 centers across the globe collaborate to standardize active surveillance (AS) protocols for men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). A centralized PCa AS database, comprising data of more than 15000 patients worldwide, was created. Comparability of the histopathology between the different cohorts was assessed by a centralized pathology review of 445 biopsies from 15 GAP3 centers. Grade group 1 (Gleason score 6) in 85% and grade group ≥2 (Gleason score ≥7) in 15% showed 89% concordance at review with moderate agreement (κ=0.56). Average biopsy core length was similar among the analyzed cohorts. Recently established highly adverse pathologies, including cribriform and/or intraductal carcinoma, were observed in 3.6% of the reviewed biopsies. In conclusion, the centralized pathology review of 445 biopsies revealed comparable histopathology among the 15 GAP3 centers with a low frequency of high-risk features. This enables further data analyses-without correction-toward uniform global AS guidelines for men with low-risk PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: Movember Foundation's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance (GAP3) initiative combines data from 15000 men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) across the globe to standardize active surveillance protocols. Histopathology review confirmed that the histopathology was consistent with low-risk PCa in most men and comparable between different centers.

ERG and PTEN have been suggested as potential prognostic markers in prostatic adenocarcinoma. We assessed the relationship between ERG and PTEN protein expression in cribriform architecture prostatic carcinomas and adjacent acinar non-cribriform carcinoma and determined the interobserver variability in assessment of these markers. A contemporary cohort of radical prostatectomy cases (n=246) were reviewed and cribriform architecture carcinomas (intraductal carcinoma and cribriform Gleason 4 carcinomas) were identified and confirmed with triple cocktail immunostaining. ERG and PTEN protein expression were independently examined across all carcinoma components by two pathologists. 57 cases were available for immunohistochemistry. ERG protein expression was concordant between the cribriform and non-cribriform acinar carcinomas in 56/57 cases. There was no interobserver discrepancy in ERG assessment. PTEN staining was concordant in 53/57 cases however 33 cases showed heterogeneous staining, most marked in the non-cribriform acinar component. The kappa value for interobserver assessment of PTEN scoring was 0.787 (moderate) with discrepant cases resolved by cooperative review. ERG protein expression shows almost complete concordance (98.2%) across cribriform and non-cribriform prostatic carcinomas. Assessment of this staining is straightforward and consistent between observers. PTEN protein expression is heterogeneous and results in only moderate interobserver agreement. Both staining heterogeneity and interpretation present challenges in analyzing PTEN protein expression.

The study aimed to determine the relationship between T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signal and histologic sub-patterns in prostate cancer areas with different Gleason grades.MR images of prostates (n = 25) were obtained prior to radical prostatectomy. These were processed as whole-mount specimens with tumors and the peripheral zone was annotated digitally by two pathologists. Gleason grade 3 was the most prevalent grade and was subdivided into packed, intermediate, and sparse based on gland-to-stroma ratio. Large cribriform, intraductal carcinoma, and small cribriform glands (grade 4 group) were separately annotated but grouped together for statistical analysis. The log MRI signal intensity for each contoured region (n = 809) was measured, and pairwise comparisons were performed using the open-source software R version 3.0.1.Packed grade 3 sub-pattern has a significantly lower MRI intensity than the grade 4 group (P 0.00001). Sparse grade 3 has a significantly higher MRI intensity than the packed grade 3 sub-pattern (P 0.0001). No significant difference in MRI intensity was observed between the Gleason grade 4 group and the sparse sub-pattern grade 3 group (P = 0.54). In multivariable analysis adjusting for peripheral zone, the P values maintained significance (packed grade 3 group vs grade 4 group, P 0.001; and sparse grade 3 sub-pattern vs packed grade 3 sub-pattern, P 0.001).This study demonstrated that T2-weighted MRI signal is dependent on histologic sub-patterns within Gleason grades 3 and 4 cancers, which may have implications for directed biopsy sampling and patient management.

Resume La Societe internationale d’uropathologie (ISUP) a organise en 2009 une conference de consensus pour la prise en charge et la stadification d’une piece de prostatectomie. Les resultats de cette conference sont resumes dans cette revue. Elle precise les recommandations concernant l’analyse macroscopique, la macroscopie, la sous-stadification pT2, le volume tumoral, l’envahissement extraprostatique, l’infiltration des vesicules seminales, l’envahissement ganglionnaire et des marges chirurgicales. Ces recommandations forment la base d’une analyse des pieces de prostatectomie necessaire a une prise en charge consensuelle et optimale.

Context: The Gleason grading system is one of the most powerful predictors of outcome in prostate cancer and a cornerstone in counseling and treating patients. Since its inception, it has undergone several modifications triggered by a change in clinical practice and a better understanding of the cancer’s histologic spectrum and variants and their prognostic significance. Objective: To provide an overview of the implementation and the impact of the Gleason system as a predictive and prognostic tool in all available treatment modalities, and to compare the original and modified Gleason systems in major pathologic and clinical outcome data sets. Evidence acquisition: A comprehensive nonsystematic Medline search was performed using multiple Medical Subject Headings such as Gleason, modified, system, outcome, biopsy, prostatectomy, recurrence, prognosis, radiotherapy, and focal therapy, with restriction to the English language and a preference for publications within the last 10 yr. All Gleason grade–related studies in the last 3 yr were reviewed. For studies before this date, we relied on prior culling of the literature for various recent books, chapters, and original articles on this topic. Evidence synthesis: Using the modified grading system resulted in disease upgrading with more cancers assigned a Gleason score � 7 than in the past. It also resulted in a more homogeneous Gleason score 6, which has an excellent prognosis when the disease is organ confined. The vast majority of studies using both systems showed that Gleason grading of adenocarcinomas on needle biopsies and radical prostatectomies was strongly associated with pathologic stage, status of surgical margins, metastatic disease, biochemical recurrence, and cancer-specific survival, with the modified system outperforming the original one in some large series. A description of the continuous incorporation of this parameter in the clinical decision making for treating prostate cancer using all currently used treatment modalities is presented, and the findings of studies before and after the inception of the modified grading system, if available, are compared. The proposed contemporary grading prognostic categories are 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8, and 9–10. Conclusions: The Gleason score is one of the most critical predictive factors of prostate cancer regardless of the therapy used. Modernization of the Gleason grading system has resulted in a more accurate grading system for radical prostatectomy (RP) but has complicated the comparison of data before and after the updating. A better prognostication with the updated Gleason grading system for patients treated with modalities other than surgery can only be postulated at this time because there are limited conflicting data on radiation and no studies on other treatment modalities. Its greatest impact is the uniformly excellent prognosis associated with Gleason score 6 in RPs.

This article reviews the proceedings of the cause and risk session of the recently held BCAN Bladder Think Tank in 2009. Understanding associations between specific genetic changes and development of particular forms of bladder cancer, whether low-grade or more invasive forms, may justify screening programs for earlier detection. A fundamental epidemiological issue is causation. Associations are supported by high rates in industrialized regions and parallel associations with cigarette smoking. The evolution to molecular and integrative epidemiology incorporates molecular and cytogenetic markers in host and tumor tissue with classic epidemiology to develop risk assessment models to identify high-risk populations. Animal models can teach us something about human bladder cancer and address the issue of the differentiation between papillary low-grade and invasive high-grade tumors. After the diagnosis of a bladder tumor, pathological risk stratification becomes important but there are weaknesses in the current grading systems. Molecular grading may provide a new, simple, and highly reproducible tool to determine bladder cancer prognosis. Based on our current knowledge, including gaps in that knowledge, education is the immediate top-priority action item. The promotion of smoking cessation is also a high priority action. The symptoms of bladder cancer, particularly hematuria, must be emphasized to both the medical and lay. Given the costs associated with the treatment and surveillance of bladder cancer, a comprehensive program supported by governmental funding sources to identify the risks associated with bladder cancer development would seem prudent.

Primary detection and follow-up of patients with non–muscle-invasive (NMI) bladder cancer (BC) is done by urethro-cystoscopy (UCS) and, in most cases, cytology. Many urine-based tests have been developed, and in general, these tests have a higher sensitivity than cytology but a lower specificity. In this review, we assessed the value of urine tests for screening, primary detection, and surveillance of NMIBC. Considering the frequency of UCS for follow-up, having markers for recurrent BC would be especially useful. Therefore, we updated our systematic review to include five commonly studied urine markers (BTA stat, NMP22, uCyt+/Immunocyt, FISH UroVysion, and microsatellite analysis) and cytology for surveillance. The sensitivity and/or specificity of cytology and these five markers were more than 5% lower for patients under surveillance compared to the numbers reported in other reviews, confirming that the performance of urine markers and cytology is lower for the detection of recurrent BC than is UCS. Recent data from the first randomized trial to investigate the possibility of lowering UCS frequency with urinary microsatellite analysis showed substantial underestimation of sensitivity and specificity if the urologist was not aware of the urine test outcome. These results question but do not replace UCS as the gold standard for NMIBC surveillance. In conclusion, cytology is still important as an adjunct for the evaluation of patients with hematuria and the surveillance of patients with high-risk NMIBC. Urine markers other than cytology may play a role in future screening studies and the follow-up of patients with low-grade (G1–2) NMIBC.

for cancer. I was one of the architects of the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) in the United Kingdom in the late 1980s and also have enjoyed the privilege of acting as independent chairman of the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) trial of PCa screening in the United Kingdom for the last 12 yr [3]. I was also one of the first to break ranks with the NHSBSP as emergingdata started to suggest that breast cancer screening was failing to liveup to itspromise.Most recently, I published a paper in the BMJ inwhich I returned to basics and posed the question in the introduction of the editorial, ‘‘Does screening for breast cancer improve LoL andorQoL?’’ The answerwas a resounding no [4]. If we are not to repeat the errors of the past, then all cancer-screening trials must be reported using absolute numbers, numbers needed to screen to avoid a causespecific death, all-cause mortality, and some measure of QoL. Impotence and incontinence might be good surrogates for the latter. Some biostatisticians get very cross with me when they argue that the trials were not powered to determine any impact on all-cause deaths. Yet hundreds of thousands of men have been randomised in screening trials, so if the signal has been lost in the background noise, it must be a very small signal. If that is indeed the case, there is the issue of opportunity costs when the same money might be used with greater wisdom to save more lives. I am confident that the ProtecT trial will not repeat the mistakes of the past.