OBJECTIVE: To report the first year's screening results for all men at enrollment in the study.
DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We recruited men aged 40-69 yr with germline BRCA1/2 mutations and a control group of men who have tested negative for a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation known to be present in their families. All men underwent prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing at enrollment, and those men with PSA >3 ng/ml were offered prostate biopsy.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: PSA levels, PCa incidence, and tumour characteristics were evaluated. The Fisher exact test was used to compare the number of PCa cases among groups and the differences among disease types.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We recruited 2481 men (791 BRCA1 carriers, 531 BRCA1 controls; 731 BRCA2 carriers, 428 BRCA2 controls). A total of 199 men (8%) presented with PSA >3.0 ng/ml, 162 biopsies were performed, and 59 PCas were diagnosed (18 BRCA1 carriers, 10 BRCA1 controls; 24 BRCA2 carriers, 7 BRCA2 controls); 66% of the tumours were classified as intermediate- or high-risk disease. The positive predictive value (PPV) for biopsy using a PSA threshold of 3.0 ng/ml in BRCA2 mutation carriers was 48%-double the PPV reported in population screening studies. A significant difference in detecting intermediate- or high-risk disease was observed in BRCA2 carriers. Ninety-five percent of the men were white, thus the results cannot be generalised to all ethnic groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The IMPACT screening network will be useful for targeted PCa screening studies in men with germline genetic risk variants as they are discovered. These preliminary results support the use of targeted PSA screening based on BRCA genotype and show that this screening yields a high proportion of aggressive disease.
PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we demonstrate that germline genetic markers can be used to identify men at higher risk of prostate cancer. Targeting screening at these men resulted in the identification of tumours that were more likely to require treatment.
Materials and Methods: We analyzed 101 cases of prostate adenocarcinoma diagnosed from January 2011 to June 2015 in 100 patients. Immunohistochemical staining of ER-beta and Ki67 was analyzed according to Gleason score categorized into prognostic groups of 1 to 5. Double-immunofluorescent staining of ER-beta and Ki67 was performed in a total of 20 cases to study the co-expression and the relationship between these markers within the same tumor.
Results: A total of 53 of 101 cases (52.5%) were positive for ER-beta expression. There was a positive correlation whereby a high percentage of ER-beta expression was seen in the higher prognostic groups (groups 4 and 5; p=0.007). High Ki67 expression was observed in the higher prognostic group, whereas low Ki67 or negative expression was found in the lower prognostic group (p<0.001). The majority of cases evaluated with double-immunofluorescent staining (14/20) showed co-expression of ER-beta and Ki67 at the individual cell level.
Conclusions: ER-beta and Ki67 are independent tumor markers in high prognostic groups. Hence, co-expression of ER-beta and Ki67 indicates a more aggressive tumor with a poorer prognosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight specimens of needle prostate biopsy and its subsequent radical prostatectomy were retrospectively studied. The GSs of the needle biopsy were compared with the corresponding prostatectomy specimens. The percentage of GP4 in GS7 needle biopsy groups was calculated and correlated with the pathological staging.
RESULTS: More than half (60%) of GS 6 needle biopsy cases (PGG 1) were upgraded in the prostatectomy specimen, while the majority (80%) of the GS7 needle biopsy groups (PGG 2 and 3) remain unchanged. Cohen's Kappa shows fair agreement in the Gleason scoring between needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens, K = 0.324 (95% CI, 6.94 to 7.29), p <0.0005 and in the percentage of GP4 in GS7 needle biopsy groups and their corresponding radical prostatectomy specimens, K = 0.399 (95% CI 34.2 - 49.2), p<0.0005. A significant relationship was seen between the percentage of GP4 in GS7 needle biopsy with the pT and pN stage of its radical prostatectomy (p = 0.008 and p=0.001 respectively).
CONCLUSION: A higher percentage of GP4 in GS7 tumour is associated with worse tumour behaviour, therefore it is crucial for clinicians to realise this in deciding the optimal treatment.
METHODS: Collaborating investigators from 15 prospective studies provided individual-participant records (from predominantly men of white European ancestry) on blood or toenail selenium concentrations and prostate cancer risk. Odds ratios of prostate cancer by selenium concentration were estimated using multivariable-adjusted conditional logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: Blood selenium was not associated with the risk of total prostate cancer (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio [OR] per 80 percentile increase = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83 to 1.23, based on 4527 case patients and 6021 control subjects). However, there was heterogeneity by disease aggressiveness (ie, advanced stage and/or prostate cancer death, Pheterogeneity = .01), with high blood selenium associated with a lower risk of aggressive disease (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.21 to 0.87) but not with nonaggressive disease. Nail selenium was inversely associated with total prostate cancer (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.40, Ptrend < .001, based on 1970 case patients and 2086 control subjects), including both nonaggressive (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.50) and aggressive disease (OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.31, Pheterogeneity = .08).
CONCLUSIONS: Nail, but not blood, selenium concentration is inversely associated with risk of total prostate cancer, possibly because nails are a more reliable marker of long-term selenium exposure. Both blood and nail selenium concentrations are associated with a reduced risk of aggressive disease, which warrants further investigation.
METHODS: DNA samples from 92 patients and 156 healthy controls collected from two medical centers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia were analyzed for four regions located at X-chromosome using the Investigator® Argus X-12 QS Kit.
RESULTS: The results demonstrated that microvariant alleles of (DXS7132, DXS10146, HPRTB, DXS10134, and DXS10135) are overrepresented in the BPH group (p < 0.00001). Allele 28 of DXS10135 and allele 15 of DXS7423 could have a protective effect, OR 0.229 (95%CI, 0.066-0.79); and OR 0.439 (95%CI, 0.208-0.925). On the other hand, patients carrying allele 23 of DXS10079 and allele 26 of DXS10148 presented an increased risk to PrCa OR 4.714 (95%CI, 3.604-6.166).
CONCLUSION: The results are in concordance with the involvement of the X chromosome in PrCa and BPH development. STR allele studies may add further information from the definition of a genetic profile of PrCa resistance or susceptibility. As TBL1, AR, LDOC1, and RPL10 genes are located at regions Xp22.31, Xq11.2-12, Xq26.2, and Xq28, respectively, these genes could play an essential role in PrCa or BPH.