Back to Authors

Haddad, Zaid

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8483-4800

Mayo Clinic

GenomeDx Biosciences Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada

Citations 19

Validation of a genomic-clinical classifier for predicting clinical progression in high-risk prostate cancer.
Buerki, Christine, Mitra, Anirban P. , Ghadessi, Mercedeh , Bergstralh, Eric J., Erho, Nicholas , Carlson, R. W. , Crisan, Anamaria, Sierocinski, Thomas , Zimmermann, Benedikt, Haddad, Zaid , Klee, George G., Fink, Stephanie, Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Jenkins, Robert B. , Black, Peter C. , Vergara, Ismael A. , Ballman, Karla V. , Kollmeyer, Thomas M. , Triche, Timothy J. , Davicioni, Elai

Journal of Clinical Oncology | March 11, 2020 | Volume: 30 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 4565-4565

10.1200/jco.2012.30.15_suppl.4565 Get It

4565 Background: The efficient delivery of adjuvant therapy after radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with prostate cancer is limited by the lack of biomarkers, beyond clinicopathologic factors, that are able to assess the risk of clinically significant disease progression. Previously, routine FFPE patient specimens from the Mayo Clinic Radical Prostatectomy Registry with long term follow-up were selected to develop a genomic classifier (GC) to predict clinical progression. Here, we present the validation of a GC in a cohort of patients at high risk of disease progression. Methods: A case-cohort study of high-risk RP patients from the Mayo Clinic (N=219) was used to validate the genomic classifier (GC) for predicting clinical progression (defined by positive bone or CT scan post-RP). Its performance was compared to a multivariable clinical classifier (CC) and a genomic-clinical classifier (GCC) which combines GC with established clinicopathologic variables. Concordance index, Cox modeling and decision curve analysis were used to compare the different models. Results: GC and GCC were predictive of clinical progression in the high-risk cohort with c-indices of 0.79 and 0.82, respectively, compared to the clinical classifier (0.70). Multivariable survival analysis showed that the majority of prognostic information of GCC came from the GC with a minor contribution from Gleason score. Decision curve analysis showed that GCC had a higher overall net benefit compared to CC over a wide range of ‘decision-to-treat’ thresholds for the risk of progression. Conclusions: In this high-risk cohort, GC and GCC classifiers showed improved performance over CC in prediction of clinical progression. GC is an independent prognostic factor in this cohort and captures the majority of prognostic information. GC and GCC’s prognostic performance and their usefulness in guiding decision-making in the adjuvant setting after RP need further testing in studies of additional prostate cancer risk groups.
Recalibration of genomic risk prediction models in prostate cancer to improve individual-level predictions.
Choeurng, Voleak, Luo, Bin , Yousefi, Kasra, Shin, Heesun , Haddad, Zaid , Ross, Ashley E. , Dicker, Adam P. , Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Thompson, Darby J. S., Dicker, Adam P , Davicioni, Elai , Schaeffer, Edward M. , Den, Robert B.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | March 7, 2019 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e16122-e16122

10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.e16122 Get It

Deciphering the genomic fingerprint of small cell prostate cancer with potential clinical utility in radical prostatectomy tissues.
Alshalalfa, Mohammed , Haddad, Zaid , Ross, Ashley E. , Karnes, Jeffrey , Tsai, Harrison , Davicioni, Elai , Schaeffer, Edward M. , Lotan, Tamara Levin

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 5055-5055

10.1200/jco.2016.34.15_suppl.5055 Get It

Development and validation of a novel clinical-genomic risk group classification for prostate cancer incorporating genomic and clinicopathologic risk.
Santiago‐Jiménez, María , Davis, John W. , Dicker, Adam P. , Pollack, Alan , Ross, Ashley E. , Plessis, Marguerite du, Choeurng, Voleak, Yousefi, Kasra, Haddad, Zaid , Weinmann, Sheila , Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Feng, Felix Y. , Dicker, Adam P , Spratt, Daniel E. , Zhang, Jingbin , Den, Robert B. , Kane, Christopher J. , Davicioni, Elai , Schaeffer, Edward M. , Klein, Eric A. , Nguyen, Paul L.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 5000-5000

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.5000 Get It

5000 Background: It is clinically challenging to integrate genomic classifier results that report a continuous numerical risk of recurrence into treatment decisions for prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to develop a novel clinical-genomic risk system that can readily be incorporated into treatment guidelines for localized PCa. Methods: Four multi-center cohorts (n = 6928 men; 5937 prospective samples and 991 retrospective samples with long-term follow-up) were utilized to identify and validate our clinical-genomic risk system in radical prostatectomy (RP) samples and subsequently in pre-treatment biopsy samples. All patients’ FFPE tissue underwent microarray analysis, and the expression values for 22 prespecified biomarkers that constitute Decipher were extracted. Cumulative incidence curves were constructed to estimate metastasis risk. C-indices were calculated to compare NCCN and CAPRA score to our clinical-genomic system. Results: With a median follow-up of 8 years for men in our RP cohort, the 10-year distant metastasis rates for NCCN low, favorable-intermediate, unfavorable-intermediate, and high-risk were 7.8%, 9.4%, 40.1%, and 41.4%, respectively. Our 3-tier clinical-genomic risk groups had 10-year distant metastasis rates of 3.7%, 30.7%, and 57.7%, for low, intermediate, and high-risk, which were validated in our pre-treatment biopsy cohort with 10-year rate of distant metastasis of 0%, 30.3%, and 63.2%, respectively. C-indices for the clinical-genomic system (0.84, 95%CI 0.62-0.92) were significantly improved over NCCN (0.71, 95%CI 0.59-0.84) and CAPRA (0.71, 95%CI 0.60-0.81) score. A total of 33.4% of men would be reclassified by the clinical-genomic system, and specifically 17.1%, 41.3%, and 19.4% of men in NCCN low, intermediate and high risk groups would be reclassified by our new system. Conclusions: The use of a readily available genomic classifier in combination with clinicopathologic variables can generate a simple to use 3-tier clinical-genomic risk system that is highly prognostic for distant metastasis, is more accurate than clinical risk, and can be easily incorporated into NCCN guidelines to inform treatment decisions.
Development and validation of genomic signature to predict ADT treatment failure.
Karnes, Jeffrey , Ashab, Hussam Al-Deen, Ross, Ashley E. , Tosoian, Jeffrey J. , Alshalalfa, Mohammed , Choeurng, Voleak, Yousefi, Kasra, Haddad, Zaid , Feng, Felix Y. , Dicker, Adam P. , Dicker, Adam P , Trock, Bruce J , Tsai, Harrison , Abdollah, Firas , Klein, Eric A. , Nguyen, Paul L. , Den, Robert B. , Davicioni, Elai , Lotan, Tamara Levin , Schaeffer, Edward M.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 5018-5018

10.1200/jco.2016.34.15_suppl.5018 Get It

Development and Validation of a Prostate Cancer Genomic Signature that Predicts Early ADT Treatment Response Following Radical Prostatectomy
Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Sharma, Vidit , Choeurng, Voleak, Ashab, Hussam Al-Deen, Erho, Nicholas , Alshalalfa, Mohammed , Ross, Ashley E. , Yousefi, Kasra, Tsai, Harrison , Zhao, Shuang G. , Tosoian, Jeffrey J. , Haddad, Zaid , Takhar, Mandeep, Chang, S. Laura , Spratt, Daniel E. , Jenkins, Robert B. , Klein, Eric A. , Nguyen, Paul L. , Dicker, Adam P. , Feng, Felix Y. , Schaeffer, Edward M. , Spratt, Daniel E , Klein, Eric A , Trock, Bruce J , Zhao, Shuang G , Abdollah, Firas , Den, Robert B. , Davicioni, Elai , Lotan, Tamara Levin , Dicker, Adam P

Clinical Cancer Research | May 14, 2018 | Volume: 24 | Issue: 16 | Pages: 3908-3916

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-17-2745 Get It

Abstract Purpose: Currently, no genomic signature exists to distinguish men most likely to progress on adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer. Here we develop and validate a gene expression signature to predict response to postoperative ADT. Experimental Design: A training set consisting of 284 radical prostatectomy patients was established after 1:1 propensity score matching metastasis between adjuvant-ADT (a-ADT)-treated and no ADT–treated groups. An ADT Response Signature (ADT-RS) was identified from neuroendocrine and AR signaling–related genes. Two independent cohorts were used to form three separate data sets for validation (set I, n = 232; set II, n = 435; set III, n = 612). The primary endpoint of the analysis was postoperative metastasis. Results: Increases in ADT-RS score were associated with a reduction in risk of metastasis only in a-ADT patients. On multivariable analysis, ADT-RS by ADT treatment interaction term remained associated with metastasis in both validation sets (set I: HR = 0.18, Pinteraction = 0.009; set II: HR = 0.25, Pinteraction = 0.019). In a matched validation set III, patients with Low ADT-RS scores had similar 10-year metastasis rates in the a-ADT and no-ADT groups (30.1% vs. 31.0%, P = 0.989). Among High ADT-RS patients, 10-year metastasis rates were significantly lower for a-ADT versus no-ADT patients (9.4% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.021). The marginal ADT-RS by ADT interaction remained significant in the matched dataset (Pinteraction = 0.035). Conclusions: Patients with High ADT-RS benefited from a-ADT. In combination with prognostic risk factors, use of ADT-RS may thus allow for identification of ADT-responsive tumors that may benefit most from early androgen blockade after radical prostatectomy. We discovered a gene signature that when present in primary prostate tumors may be useful to predict patients who may respond to early ADT after surgery. Clin Cancer Res; 24(16); 3908–16. ©2018 AACR.
Validation of a genomic risk classifier to predict metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality in men with positive lymph nodes.
Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Davis, John W. , Haddad, Zaid , Yousefi, Kasra, Ross, Ashley E. , Trock, Bruce J , Claessens, Frank , Davicioni, Elai

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 26, 2018 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 6_suppl | Pages: 125-125

10.1200/jco.2018.36.6_suppl.125 Get It

125 Background: Men with lymph node involvement (LNI) at prostatectomy (RP) are at high risk of dying from prostate cancer. However, survival following RP is highly variable, with some men apparently cured. Nomograms developed for men with LNI have been based on series where all or the vast majority of men received adjuvant treatment. Because administration of adjuvant treatment is not universal, even for LNI, we evaluated whether the Decipher genomic classifier (GC) can improve upon clinical models to predict metastasis within 5 years (MET5) and prostate cancer specific mortality within 10 years (PCSM10) in a cohort of LNI patients, the majority of whom did not receive adjuvant treatment. Methods: 141 patients from 4 institutions (Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, Leuven, MD Anderson) had LNI at RP, had adequate tissue and clinical data for analysis of MET5, and 86 were analyzed for PCSM10. 43% of men received adjuvant therapy. RP tumor tissue was analyzed by Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST GeneChip; the GC was calculated based on 22 genes in the previously trained and validated algorithm. Logistic regression evaluated whether the GC, dichotomized as high risk (GC score > 0.6) vs low-intermediate risk (≤0.6), improved prediction of MET5 and PCSM10 beyond that achieved with established clinical prognostic factors. Results: 62 men (43%) developed MET5, and 35 (41%) developed PCSM10. For both MET5 and PCSM10 CAPRA-S, number of positive lymph nodes, and age were significant; adjuvant therapy was not significant. GC was a significant independent strong prognostic factor when added to the clinical model for prediction of MET5, odds ratio = 4.04 (95% CI: 1.48, 11.02), p = 0.006, and prediction of PCSM10, odds ratio = 6.71 (95% CI: 2.01, 22.38), p = 0.002. Addition of GC to the clinical model improved the AUC from 0.77 to 0.79 for MET5, and from 0.65 to 0.74 for PCSM10. Conclusions: The Decipher GC significantly improves upon clinical variables to predict metastasis and prostate cancer specific mortality in men at high risk due to LNI. This is the first study to show a genomic classifier predicts outcomes in men with LNI; validation is needed to determine if Decipher can improve treatment decisions in men with LNI.
Individual patient level meta-analysis of the performance of the Decipher genomic classifier in high-risk men post-prostatectomy to predict development of metastatic disease.
Yousefi, Kasra, Deheshi, Samineh, Ross, Ashley E. , Karnes, Jeffrey , Glass, Andrew G., Freedland, Stephen J. , Lam, Lucia L.C., Plessis, Marguerite du, Choeurng, Voleak, Haddad, Zaid , Buerki, Christine, Weinmann, Sheila , Feng, Felix Y. , Spratt, Daniel E. , Schaeffer, Edward M. , Trock, Bruce J , Den, Robert B. , Dicker, Adam P. , Davicioni, Elai , Klein, Eric A.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | March 29, 2017 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 6_suppl | Pages: 133-133

10.1200/jco.2017.35.6_suppl.133 Get It

133 Background: The genomic classifier, Decipher, has been validated to predict risk of metastasis after radical prostatectomy (RP). However, the cohort size and event rate in the previous studies did not allow for a thorough investigation into performance within individual clinicopathologic or treatment subgroups. In this study, we present the first meta-analysis of the performance of the 22-marker genomic classifier in men with prostate cancer (PCa) post-RP. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Decipher genomic resource information database were searched for published reports of men with PCa treated by RP between 2010 and 2016 where the benefit of the Decipher genomic classifier test was assessed. The primary end point was the ability of Decipher to independently improve prognostication of regional or distant metastasis over routine clinicopathologic factors. Meta-analysis was performed with random-effects modeling, and extent of heterogeneity between studies was determined with the I2 test. Results: Five studies (975 total patients, and 855 with individual patient genomic and clinicopathologic data) were eligible for analysis. The median follow-up was 8 years. All patients had clinical high-risk disease, yet 60.9%, 22.6%, and 16.5% of patients were classified as low, intermediate, and high-risk, respectively by Decipher and had 10-year cumulative incidence rates of metastases of 5.5%, 15.0% and 26.7% (p < 0.001), respectively. Adjusting for standard clinicopathologic variables, on multivariable analysis Decipher remained a statistically significant predictor of metastasis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30 per 0.1 unit, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-1.47, p < 0.001), and the summary HR for metastasis of Decipher across the 5 studies was 1.52 (95% CI 1.39-1.67) per 0.1 unit. Conclusions: The genomic classifier test, Decipher, has the ability to independently improve prognostication of men post-RP, as well as within nearly all clinicopathologic and treatment subgroups. Strong consideration should be given to incorporating the use of genomic testing in clinical decision making and clinical trials to better individualize treatment.
Clinical and genomic analysis of metastatic disease progression in a background of biochemical recurrence.
Crisan, Anamaria, Ghadessi, Mercedeh , Buerki, Christine, Thompson, Darby J. S., Erho, Nicholas , Sierocinski, Thomas , Haddad, Zaid , Zimmermann, Benedikt, Sosu-Sedzorme, Worlanyo , Harko, Sebastian, Jenkins, Robert B. , Vergara, Ismael A. , Black, Peter C. , Davicioni, Elai

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 24, 2017 | Volume: 30 | Issue: 30_suppl | Pages: 90-90

10.1200/jco.2012.30.30_suppl.90 Get It

90 Background: Biochemical recurrence (BCR) may be an indicator of metastatic prostate cancer; however, it isn't specific enough to differentiate patients who will experience rapid onset of metastases from those who do not. Such lack of specificity leads to overtreatment of men who will likely never experience metastatic disease in their lifetime. We hypothesize that genomic biomarkers, detectable in primary tumor tissue, may better identify rapidly progressing metastatic prostate cancer. Methods: FFPE prostatectomy specimens (n = 309) from the Mayo Clinic tumor registry were profiled using a high-density expression array. Patients were retrospectively classified into three outcome groups: NED (no evidence of disease recurrence); BCR-only (patients that experienced BCR but no metastatic progression); and MET (metastatic disease confirmed by positive CT or bone scans) and were matched on several criteria for analysis . Uni- and multi-variable analyses between outcome groups were used to analyze clinical and genomic variables (adjusting for adjuvant hormone therapy as a confounding factor). Results: Median follow-up was 16.8 years and MET patients were diagnosed a mean of 3.1 years following BCR. Univariable and multivariable analysis of clinical variables failed to show statistically significant differences between NED and BCR-only outcome groups. Differential expression analysis between NED and BCR-only groups showed no significant differences after false discovery correction. Conversely, 6,277 and 52,020 biomarkers were differentially expressed between MET and the BCR-only and NED groups, respectively. Conclusions: Considering the clinical and genomic results together, patients who experienced rapid metastatic disease were significantly different from both the NED and BCR-only groups. However, no significant differences were identified between the BCR-only and NED outcome groups. These results imply that BCR is not a good surrogate for men who are likely to experience rapid onset of metastatic disease and lethal prostate cancer.
Development and validation of a digital Gleason score biomarker signature for risk stratification of patients with prostate cancer.
Erho, Nicholas , Buerki, Christine, Ghadessi, Mercedeh , Crisan, Anamaria, Sierocinski, Thomas , Haddad, Zaid , Zimmermann, Benedikt, Harko, Sebastian, Sosu-Sedzorme, Worlanyo , Jenkins, Robert B. , Vergara, Ismael A. , Triche, Timothy J. , Davicioni, Elai

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 24, 2017 | Volume: 30 | Issue: 30_suppl | Pages: 40-40

10.1200/jco.2012.30.30_suppl.40 Get It

40 Background: Gleason score (GS) is the most widely used grading system of cell differentiation in prostate cancer and one of the best pathological predictors of disease progression. Patients with high GS (> 7) are the most likely to experience metastasis, whereas patients with low GS (< 7) are expected to have favorable long-term outcomes. In addition to the subjective nature of GS assessment, patients with GS 7 represent a heterogeneous group in terms of patient outcomes. In this study a biomarker signature is developed and validated which could improve the prediction of high risk disease among GS 7 radical prostatectomy (RP) patients. Methods: Patient specimens from the Mayo Clinic RP Registry (n = 764) were used for feature selection and training of a 392-feature K-nearest neighbor (KNN, k = 11) classifier. These 392 genomic features were identified by assessing differential expression between patients with GS < 7 and those with GS > 7, using a Bonferroni adjusted T-Test with a p-value threshold of 0.05. The classifier was subsequently validated in two independent patient cohorts (Memorial Sloan Kettering [MSKCC] and German Cancer Research Center [DKFZ]) and compared to a state of the art biomarker signature (Penney et al. 2011). Results: In the MSKCC dataset (GSE21034) our model segregated GS < 7 from GS > 7 patients (n = 56) with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.97, comparable to the AUC of 0.94 obtained by Penney et al. in their independent validation set (n = 45). Strong performance was observed by our model when discriminating between primary Gleason grade (pGG) 3 and pGG 4 & 5 patients in the MSKCC (n = 130) and DKFZ prostate cancer (GSE29079, n = 47) datasets, achieving AUCs of 0.75 and 0.87, respectively. In the challenging GS 7 subset, our model segregated GS 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 patients in the DKFZ dataset (n = 64) with an AUC of 0.81 outperforming the Penney et al. signature (AUC = 0.60). Conclusions: A biomarker signature was developed which discriminates between low and high GS patients, outperforming a previously reported signature. Further validation of this biomarker signature in additional post RP patients, as well as, pretreatment biopsy specimens is warranted.