Understanding mixed messages about prostate specific antigen: biases in the evaluation of cancer biomarkers.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Bias↗
Biomedical subjects
Ian M Thompson
Publications and source records attributed to Ian M Thompson.
Clinically localised prostate cancer.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Androgen Antagonists↗
Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial.
CONTEXT: Despite a stage-shift to earlier cancer stages and lower tumor volumes for prostate cancer, pathologically advanced disease is detected at radical prostatectomy in 38% to 52% of patients. However, the optimal management of these patients after radical prostatectomy is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adjuvant radiotherapy improves metastasis-free survival in patients with stage pT3 N0 M0 prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized, prospective, multi-institutional, US clinical trial with enrollment between August 15, 1988, and January 1, 1997 (with database frozen for statistical analysis on September 21, 2005). Patients were 425 men with pathologically advanced prostate cancer who had undergone radical prostatectomy. INTERVENTION: Men were randomly assigned to receive 60 to 64 Gy of external beam radiotherapy delivered to the prostatic fossa (n = 214) or usual care plus observation (n = 211). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was metastasis-free survival, defined as time to first occurrence of metastatic disease or death due to any cause. Secondary outcomes included prostate-specific antigen (PSA) relapse, recurrence-free survival, overall survival, freedom from hormonal therapy, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Among the 425 men, median follow-up was 10.6 years (interquartile range, 9.2-12.7 years). For metastasis-free survival, 76 (35.5%) of 214 men in the adjuvant radiotherapy group were diagnosed with metastatic disease or died (median metastasis-free estimate, 14.7 years), compared with 91 (43.1%) of 211 (median metastasis-free estimate, 13.2 years) of those in the observation group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.55-1.02; P = .06). There were no significant between-group differences for overall survival (71 deaths, median survival of 14.7 years for radiotherapy vs 83 deaths, median survival of 13.8 years for observation; HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.58-1.09; P = .16). PSA relapse (median PSA relapse-free survival, 10.3 years for radiotherapy vs 3.1 years for observation; HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.31-0.58; P<.001) and disease recurrence (median recurrence-free survival, 13.8 years for radiotherapy vs 9.9 years for observation; HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.82; P = .001) were both significantly reduced with radiotherapy. Adverse effects were more common with radiotherapy vs observation (23.8% vs 11.9%), including rectal complications (3.3% vs 0%), urethral strictures (17.8% vs 9.5%), and total urinary incontinence (6.5% vs 2.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In men who had undergone radical prostatectomy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer, adjuvant radiotherapy resulted in significantly reduced risk of PSA relapse and disease recurrence, although the improvements in metastasis-free survival and overall survival were not statistically significant. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00394511.
Adult↗
Effect of finasteride on the sensitivity of PSA for detecting prostate cancer.
BACKGROUND: In the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT), men receiving finasteride had a 24.8% lower risk of prostate cancer than men receiving placebo but a higher risk of high-grade cancer. We examined the impact of finasteride on the sensitivity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for detecting prostate cancer. METHODS: We studied men in the placebo and finasteride groups of the PCPT who had a prostate biopsy and concurrent PSA tests during the 7-year study. We compared the placebo and finasteride groups for sensitivity and AUC of PSA for the detection of all prostate cancer, of Gleason grade 7 or higher prostate cancer, and of Gleason grade 8 or higher prostate cancer. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Of 5112 men in the placebo group, prostate cancer was detected in 1111. Gleason tumor grade was available for 1100 men, of whom 240 had grade 7 or higher and 55 had grade 8 or higher. Of 4579 men in the finasteride group, 695 had prostate cancer. Gleason grade was available for 686 men, of whom 264 had grade 7 or higher and 81 had grade 8 or higher. The AUC of PSA for all outcomes was greater for the finasteride group than the placebo group. For detecting prostate cancer versus no cancer, the AUCs were 0.757 and 0.681, respectively (P < .001); for detecting Gleason grade > or = 7 versus < or = 6 or no cancer, the AUCs were 0.838 and 0.781, respectively (P = .003); and for detecting Gleason grade > or = 8 versus < or = 7 or no cancer, the AUCs were 0.886 and 0.824, respectively (P = .071). The sensitivity of PSA was higher for men in the finasteride group than in the placebo group at all PSA cutoffs matched by specificity. CONCLUSIONS: PSA had statistically significantly better sensitivity and AUC for detecting prostate cancer in the finasteride arm of the PCPT than in the placebo arm. This bias would be expected to contribute to greater detection of all grades of prostate cancer with finasteride.
Aged↗
Current status of lymph node-positive prostate cancer: Incidence and predictors of outcome.
In early surgical series, the incidence of positive lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer was approximately 40%. In the modern era of screening and improved patient selection, the incidence is now <10%, although most series excluded patients with higher risk disease. The risk of having positive lymph nodes is influenced by disease stage, prostate-specific antigen level, and tumor grade and by the aggressiveness of lymph node dissection. Many of the same factors predict the outcome of these patients. Although the percentage of patients with positive lymph nodes has declined, there remain significant numbers of patients with lymph node-positive prostate cancer, and it remains a therapeutic dilemma.
Humans↗
Treatment options in lymph node-positive prostate cancer.
With improved awareness and screening, the incidence of lymph node-positive prostate cancer has declined dramatically over the last 50 years. Stage of cancer, prostate-specific antigen, and grade are risk factors for positive lymph nodes; and those factors, along with the number of involved lymph nodes, are prognostic factors for outcome. Although the numbers have declined, the number of men with lymph node-positive prostate cancer remains significant, and the current challenge is how best to treat these patients. Commonly used treatments include any combination of androgen ablation, surgery, and radiation. There have been a few studies with chemotherapy, and no treatment has been proven superior to the others. Consequently, there remain several reasonable alternatives to treatment, and long-term survival is not unusual.
Androgen Antagonists↗
Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.
BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is the primary method used to diagnose prostate cancer in the United States. Methods to integrate other risk factors associated with prostate cancer into individualized risk prediction are needed. We used prostate biopsy data from men who participated in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) to develop a predictive model of prostate cancer. METHODS: We included 5519 men from the placebo group of the PCPT who underwent prostate biopsy, had at least one PSA measurement and a digital rectal examination (DRE) performed during the year before the biopsy, and had at least two PSA measurements performed during the 3 years before the prostate biopsy. Logistic regression was used to model the risk of prostate cancer and high-grade disease associated with age at biopsy, race, family history of prostate cancer, PSA level, PSA velocity, DRE result, and previous prostate biopsy. Risk equations were created from the estimated logistic regression models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 1211 (21.9%) men were diagnosed with prostate cancer by prostate biopsy. Variables that predicted prostate cancer included higher PSA level, positive family history of prostate cancer, and abnormal DRE result, whereas a previous negative prostate biopsy was associated with reduced risk. Neither age at biopsy nor PSA velocity contributed independent prognostic information. Higher PSA level, abnormal DRE result, older age at biopsy, and African American race were predictive for high-grade disease (Gleason score > or =7) whereas a previous negative prostate biopsy reduced this risk. CONCLUSIONS: This predictive model allows an individualized assessment of prostate cancer risk and risk of high-grade disease for men who undergo a prostate biopsy.
Black or African American↗
Detection of recurrent copy number loss at Yp11.2 involving TSPY gene cluster in prostate cancer using array-based comparative genomic hybridization.
Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among American men. The loss of Y chromosome has been frequently observed in primary prostate cancer as well as other types of cancer. Earlier, we showed that introduction of the human Y chromosome suppresses the in vivo tumorigenicity of the prostate cancer cell line PC-3. To further characterize the Y chromosome, we have developed a high-density bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) microarray containing 178 BAC clones from the human Y chromosome. BAC microarray was used for array comparative genomic hybridization on prostate cancer samples and cell lines. The most prominent observation on prostate cancer specimens was a deletion at Yp11.2 containing the TSPY tandem gene array. Out of 36 primary prostate tumors analyzed, 16 (44.4%) samples exhibited loss of TSPY gene copies. Notably, we observed association between the number of TSPY copies in the blood and the incidence of prostate cancer. Moreover, PC-3 hybrids with an intact Yp11.2 did not grow tumors in nude mice, whereas PC-3 hybrids with a deletion at Yp11.2 grew tumors in nude mice.
Aged↗
Selenium accumulation in prostate tissue during a randomized, controlled short-term trial of l-selenomethionine: a Southwest Oncology Group Study.
PURPOSE: Epidemiologic and clinical data suggest that selenium could prevent prostate cancer, but it has not been shown that supplemental selenium leads to an increased concentration of selenium in prostate tissue compared with adjacent tissue. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a randomized, controlled, short-term trial of l-selenomethionine (SeMet) versus observation in men with organ-confined prostate cancer. The primary endpoint was the measurement of selenium concentration in prostate tissue and seminal vesicle (SV). We assessed baseline selenium levels in serum and in toenail specimens (reflecting long-term intake) and post-intervention selenium levels in serum, and in prostate and SV tissues using hydride generation atomic fluorescence spectroscopy. RESULTS: Sixty-six eligible patients were randomly assigned to the SeMet (n = 34) or observation (n = 32) arm; both arms had similar baseline patient characteristics. Baseline serum selenium was similar in the two groups (P = 0.64). Baseline toenail selenium levels were slightly higher in the SeMet group than in the control group (P = 0.07). After the intervention, the mean serum selenium level increased 15% in the SeMet arm and was higher than in the observation arm (P = 0.001). The selenium concentration in prostate tissue was 22% higher in the SeMet arm (n = 26) than in the observation arm (n = 25; 1.80 versus 1.47 ppm; P = 0.003, Wilcoxon rank sum test) and remained significantly higher after adjusting for chronic selenium intake (P = 0.021, ANCOVA). SV selenium concentration was similar in both groups (P = 0.384) and was lower than in prostate tissue. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is the first to show that selenium taken as oral supplementation accumulates preferentially in the human prostate gland as opposed to the SV. These findings support the hypothesis that oral selenium supplementation may contribute to the cancer preventive effects of selenium.
Adenocarcinoma↗
Associations of demographic and lifestyle characteristics with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration and rate of PSA increase.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine whether demographic and lifestyle characteristics are associated with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and the rate of PSA increase (PSA velocity). METHODS: Data for this study came from 3341 participants in the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial who, based on biopsies at the end of the study, were free of prostate carcinoma. Linear regression was used to assess associations of age, race, smoking, body mass index (BMI), physical activity, diet, and supplement use with PSA concentration during the second year of the trial, and linear mixed models were used to assess associations of these factors with PSA velocity (the percentage increase in PSA per year) during 6 years of the trial. RESULTS: Between the group of men ages 50-59 years and the group of men age 70 years and older, mean PSA increased by 0.22 ng/mL, and PSA velocity decreased by 1.2 percentage points (both P < 0.001). The PSA level among men who had a BMI > or = 35 kg/cm(2) was 0.20 ng/mL lower than the PSA level among men who had a BMI < 25 kd/cm(2) (P < 0.001), but BMI was not associated with PSA velocity. PSA velocity was 1.2 percentage points higher in African-American men compared with white men (P = 0.043). Low energy intake and the use of high-dose calcium supplements were associated with significantly lower PSA velocity (both P = 0.05). Weight gain also was associated with lower PSA velocity. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in PSA concentration associated with demographic and lifestyle characteristics were small and were not likely to bias the interpretation of a single PSA test. Age, race, energy intake, calcium supplement use, and weight change were associated with substantial differences in PSA velocity, and the clinical interpretation of PSA velocity may be biased by these factors.
Age Factors↗
Prostate cancer detection strategies.
Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in men and, as a result, there has been a nationwide emphasis on screening and detection. With the widespread use of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate cancer screening effectively detects localized prostate cancer. However, recent reports have identified a significant proportion of prostate cancer in men with low PSA levels. Many of these cancers are higher-grade malignancies. Consequently, PSA may function more effectively as a screening tool when applied over a continuum that is associated with degree of risk, rather than a binary measure. Other markers are currently being investigated. Ideally, a marker will identify the malignancy that is a clinical threat, thereby avoiding intervention for indolent disease. Prevention strategies may be employed for higher-risk patients, and these strategies eventually may be tailored to genetic or other risks.
Genetic Markers↗
Chemoprevention of prostate cancer.
Prostate cancer is a common malignancy with multiple potential opportunities for cancer prevention. As the genetic basis of this malignancy is further understood, prevention strategies will be developed for individual patients based on specific risk factors and pathways of carcinogenesis. The PCPT has conclusively proven that prostate cancer prevention is possible. The results of the SELECT should be available within several years. An enormous challenge for the medical community will be the development of an efficient strategy to evaluate the substantial number of dietary, behavioral, and pharmacologic prevention opportunities. Ultimately, the goal of prostate can-cer prevention is to (1) identify men who are destined to develop clinically significant prostate cancer, and (2) provide individualized agents to prevent disease development.
Anticarcinogenic Agents↗
Locally advanced prostate cancer treated with concomitant radiation and 5-fluorouracil: Southwest Oncology Group Study 9024.
PURPOSE: Radiation is considered the standard treatment for locally advanced (T3 and T4) prostate cancer but cure with radiation alone is infrequent. Studies have shown that adding androgen ablation improves the results but there is still much room for improvement. We performed a phase II multi-institutional study to explore the feasibility of concomitant chemoradiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had prostate cancer with clinical evidence of invasion through the prostatic capsule or into the seminal vesicles without evidence of nodal or distant metastasis. Prior prostatectomy was not allowed and patients could not be candidates for surgical resection due to medical reasons or refusal of surgery. Radiation consisted of 7,020 cGy in 39 fractions. Continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil at a dose of 200 mg/m2 daily was started on day 1 and continued 7 days weekly until the last day of radiation. RESULTS: All 30 eligible patients were evaluated for toxicity. Diarrhea was the most common toxicity with grade 3 and 4 diarrhea in 2 and 1 patients, respectively. The only other grade 4 toxicity was hemorrhagic cystitis in 1 patient. There was 1 incident each of grade 3 stomatitis, congestive heart failure, edema, proctitis and hematuria. No patient with grade 3 or 4 toxicity required treatment delay. Ten patients (33%) achieved a negative biopsy and 13 (43%) achieved prostate specific antigen less than 1.0 ng/ml. Six patients (20%) achieved a complete response, defined as negative biopsy and prostate specific antigen less than 1.0 (95% CI 8 to 39). Patients without any biopsies or without prostate specific antigen followup were assumed to be nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: Toxicity was acceptable. The modest response rate indicates that better chemotherapy that improves local and systemic failure is necessary to improve the results. This study confirms the feasibility of a combined chemoradiotherapy approach.
Adenocarcinoma↗
Defining high risk prostate cancer--where do we set the bar? A translational science approach to risk stratification.
PURPOSE: Risk stratification is commonly used in patients with prostate cancer but this effort has had no demonstrable effect on patient decision making for initial therapy. We propose new risk strata for clinically localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined current stratification methods for prostate cancer and their impact on prostate cancer therapy. RESULTS: Three risk strata for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer are proposed. Stratum 1 includes patients in whom active surveillance is associated with a low risk of disease progression. Stratum 2 includes patients in whom monotherapy, including external beam, interstitial radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy, is generally successful. Stratum 3 includes patients at high risk for recurrence with monotherapy in whom multimodal therapy may be superior. CONCLUSIONS: Risk stratification systems for prostate cancer should harmonize the needs of researchers to develop comparable groupings of patients, of patients who seek guidance on optimal therapy and of clinical trialists who seek to advance therapy for this disease. Our new stratification system provides such a structure.
Decision Making↗
Recommendations for defining and treating high risk localized prostate cancer.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Antineoplastic Agents↗
External validation of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in a screened population.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the recently developed Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) prostate cancer risk calculator in the San Antonio Center of Biomarkers of Risk for Prostate Cancer (SABOR) cohort of the Early Detection Research Network, a younger and more ethnically diverse population than that in the PCPT. METHODS: From 3488 SABOR participants, we identified 446 who had undergone prostate biopsy and had undergone prostate-specific antigen measurement and digital rectal examination before biopsy. Most biopsies were performed for abnormal digital rectal examination findings, a prostate-specific antigen level of more than 2.5 ng/mL, or elevated risk because of a first-degree relative with prostate cancer. We evaluated the operating characteristics of the PCPT calculator for detecting prostate cancer in this cohort of SABOR participants. Of the 446 men in this cohort, 24% were younger than 55 years of age. RESULTS: Of the 446 men who had undergone biopsy, 148 (33.2%) had prostate cancer. The observed SABOR prostate cancer rates increased with increasing PCPT risk: 15.7%, 39.0%, 48.8%, and 100.0% for a PCPT risk calculator value of less than 25%, 25% to 50%, 50% to 75%, and greater than 75%, respectively. The PCPT risk calculator had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 65.5% (95% confidence interval 60.2% to 70.8%, P < 0.0001), was greater in African-American men (area under curve of 80.0%, 95% confidence interval 67.8% to 92.2%) than in other races (P = 0.02), and was not different in Hispanic men (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study have shown that the PCPT risk calculator, available from the Internet and incorporating the current best panel of risk factors, is valid in other, more diverse, populations.
Aged↗
Association between an estrogen receptor alpha gene polymorphism and the risk of prostate cancer in black men.
PURPOSE: Studies suggest that SNPs within ESR1 may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer. We evaluated the association of the XbaI and PvuII ESR1 SNPs and prostate cancer risk in 3 different racial/ethnic populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1,603 volunteers from the SABOR study (285 black, 876 white and 442 Hispanic men) were genotyped to assess allelic frequencies of the ESR1 SNPs. Case-control analysis was performed on 598 prostate cancer cases and 1,098 controls (260 black men, 1,013 non-Hispanic white men and 423 Hispanic white men) to assess the association between these polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk. RESULTS: Allelic frequency was significantly different across ethnic/racial groups for both SNPs. Logistic regression analysis adjusted for age and stratified by race and ethnicity demonstrated an association between the AG genotype or presence of the G allele (GG or AG genotype) in the XbaI SNP and prostate cancer risk within black men (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.07-4.70, p = 0.031; OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.05-4.35, p = 0.035, respectively). No association was observed among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white men for this SNP. Furthermore, there was no association between the PvuII SNP and prostate cancer risk across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates an association between the AG genotype, as well as presence of the G allele within the XbaI ESR1 SNP and prostate cancer risk among black men.
Aged↗
The prostate cancer prevention trial: design, biases and interpretation of study results.
PURPOSE: We describe the complexities of the study design of the PCPT and how they influenced the end point chosen, trial implementation, analysis and interpretation of the results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the PCPT are provided to evaluate and quantify the potential biases of this trial design. RESULTS: Six potential sources of bias, including prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination, prostate biopsy technique, study medication nonadherence and contamination, and transurethral prostate resection are presented. These biases resulted in the need for the end of study biopsy to evaluate the trial objectives. CONCLUSIONS: There were a large number of known and potential biases that worked for and against finasteride. Because of the trial design and inherent biases, it is imperative that interim biopsy results should be interpreted with caution. While the period prevalence end point that relied on an end of study biopsy was perhaps not the most clinically relevant, it was the only way to remove as much bias as possible and meet the study objective of determining if finasteride could decrease the risk of prostate cancer. The success of the PCPT depended on constant scrutiny by the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee to monitor these biases. The design and biopsy assumptions outlined at the inception of the trial were met, including adherence and contamination rates, the for-cause biopsy rate and the final percent of men with study end points.
Bias↗