Spratt, Daniel E.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations regarding diagnosis, risk stratification and workup, treatment options for localized disease, and management of recurrent and advanced disease for clinicians who treat patients with prostate cancer. The portions of the guidelines included herein focus on the roles of germline and somatic genetic testing, risk stratification with nomograms and tumor multigene molecular testing, androgen deprivation therapy, secondary hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy in patients with prostate cancer.

Abstract Background Predictive molecular biomarkers to select optimal treatment for patients with glioblastoma and other cancers are lacking. New strategies are needed when large randomized trials with correlative molecular data are not feasible. Methods Gene signatures (GS) were developed from 31 orthotopic glioblastoma patient-derived xenografts (PDXs), treated with standard therapies, to predict benefit from radiotherapy (RT-GS), temozolomide (Chemo-GS), or the combination (ChemoRT-GS). Independent validation was performed in a heterogeneously treated clinical cohort of 502 glioblastoma patients with overall survival as the primary endpoint. Multivariate Cox analysis was used to adjust for confounding variables and evaluate interactions between signatures and treatment. Results PDX models recapitulated the clinical heterogeneity of glioblastoma patients. RT-GS, Chemo-GS, and ChemoRT-GS were correlated with benefit from treatment in the PDX models. In independent clinical validation, higher RT-GS scores were associated with increased survival only in patients receiving RT (P = 0.0031, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78 [0.66–0.92]), higher Chemo-GS scores were associated with increased survival only in patients receiving chemotherapy (P < 0.0001, HR = 0.66 [0.55–0.8]), and higher ChemoRT-GS scores were associated with increased survival only in patients receiving ChemoRT (P = 0.0001, HR = 0.54 [0.4–0.74]). RT-GS and ChemoRT-GS had significant interactions with treatment on multivariate analysis (P = 0.0009 and 0.02, respectively), indicating that they are bona fide predictive biomarkers. Conclusions Using a novel PDX-driven methodology, we developed and validated 3 platform-independent molecular signatures that predict benefit from standard of care therapies for glioblastoma. These signatures may be useful to personalize glioblastoma treatment in the clinic and this approach may be a generalizable method to identify predictive biomarkers without resource-intensive randomized trials.

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.

Purpose Molecular characterization of prostate cancer, including The Cancer Genome Atlas, has revealed distinct subtypes with underlying genomic alterations. One of these core subtypes, SPOP (speckle-type POZ protein) mutant prostate cancer, has previously only been identifiable via DNA sequencing, which has made the impact on prognosis and routinely used risk stratification parameters unclear. Methods We have developed a novel gene expression signature, classifier (Subclass Predictor Based on Transcriptional Data), and decision tree to predict the SPOP mutant subclass from RNA gene expression data and classify common prostate cancer molecular subtypes. We then validated and further interrogated the association of prostate cancer molecular subtypes with pathologic and clinical outcomes in retrospective and prospective cohorts of 8,158 patients. Results The subclass predictor based on transcriptional data model showed high sensitivity and specificity in multiple cohorts across both RNA sequencing and microarray gene expression platforms. We predicted approximately 8% to 9% of cases to be SPOP mutant from both retrospective and prospective cohorts. We found that the SPOP mutant subclass was associated with lower frequency of positive margins, extraprostatic extension, and seminal vesicle invasion at prostatectomy; however, SPOP mutant cancers were associated with higher pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The association between SPOP mutant status and higher PSA level was validated in three independent cohorts. Despite high pretreatment PSA, the SPOP mutant subtype was associated with a favorable prognosis with improved metastasis-free survival, particularly in patients with high-risk preoperative PSA levels. Conclusion Using a novel gene expression model and a decision tree algorithm to define prostate cancer molecular subclasses, we found that the SPOP mutant subclass is associated with higher preoperative PSA, less adverse pathologic features, and favorable prognosis. These findings suggest a paradigm in which the interpretation of common risk stratification parameters, particularly PSA, may be influenced by the underlying molecular subtype of prostate cancer.

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.

24 Background: The use of radical prostatectomy (RP) as initial treatment of high-risk/locally-advanced prostate cancer is increasing but patients (pts) with adverse pathologic features such as positive surgical margins or T3 disease have up to 70% recurrence risk. These high-risk pts may be managed with adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) or early salvage radiotherapy (ESRT). The optimal timing of post-operative radiotherapy is unclear. Methods: Individual data from 1566 consecutive pts with pT2N0M0/R1 or pT3N0M0/R0-1 disease who underwent post-prostatectomy ART or ESRT (1987-2013) at 10 academic centers were pooled. Post-irradiation freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), freedom from distant metastases (FFDM), prostate-cancer specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate competing-risks regression (MVA) analyses. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to account for covariates potentially associated with treatment allocation. All outcomes were measured from the date of surgery to address lead time bias. Results: After PS-matching, median follow-up after surgery was 66 vs. 73 months for the ART and ESRT groups, respectively, and baseline characteristics were well-matched. ART was associated with higher FFBF (12-yr: 69% vs. 43%; log-rank P < 0.0001), FFDM (12-yr: 95% vs. 85%; log-rank P = 0.03), PCSS (12-yr: 99% vs. 94%; log-rank P = 0.048), and OS (12-yr: 91% vs. 79%; log-rank P = 0.01). ART, lower Gleason score, lower T-stage, nodal irradiation, and postoperative androgen deprivation therapy were favorable prognostic features on MVA for BF. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the decreased risk of BF associated with ART remained significant unless more than 56% of ART pts were cured by surgery alone. This threshold is greater than the estimated 12-yr FFBF of 46% after RP alone as determined by a contemporary nomogram. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this represents the largest multi-institutional study to date comparing ART to ESRT. ART was associated with reduced biochemical recurrence, distant metastases, and death compared to ESRT for high-risk pts, pending prospective validation.

2 Background: Significant genomic diversity exists in the androgen receptor ( AR) and its activity (AR-A) in mCRPC. In localized prostate cancer, the biologic, prognostic, and therapeutic clinical implications of AR-A heterogeneity have yet to be interrogated Methods: Genome-wide expression profiles of FFPE RP or biopsy tumor samples were evaluated from a prospective registry cohort (n = 5,239, NCT02609269) and six retrospective institutional cohorts (n = 1,170). AR-A was calculated based on expression of 9 targets of AR.. Results: Utilizing 6,409 localized prostate adenocarcinomas with full transcriptomic data, we found there was marked inter-individual transcriptomic diversity in AR and AR-A expression, and weak correlation between them (r = 0.08 to 0.36 based on cohort), in contrast to mCRPC that has a strong correlation between AR and AR-A expression (r = 0.76). Additionally, serum PSA had no correlation to intratumoral AR-A (r = 0.06). Unsupervised hierarchical clustering identified a distinct subclass of low AR-A prostate tumors, which had increased markers of immunogenicity (decreased T-regs and MDSCs, and increased CD3 effector T-cells), increased neuroendocrine marker expression ( NCAM1, ENO2, and SCG2), and decreased DNA repair pathway expression (all p < 0.001). Clinically, low AR-A tumors had more rapid development of metastatic disease in three independent cohorts, were more prone to develop resistance to hormonal therapy and develop CRPC, and were found at an increased frequency in African-American men. Interrogating in vitro drug sensitivity analyses utilizing the NCI-60 panel, low AR-A tumors appear more sensitive to platinum chemotherapy and PARP inhibition, and less sensitive to hormone therapy and taxanes. Conclusions: The diversity in AR-signaling in localized prostate cancer represents important biological heterogeneity that is both prognostic and predictive of treatment response. These findings are provocative in that low AR-A tumors may be more susceptible to immunotherapy, PARP inhibition, platinum chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy. Patients with low AR-A tumors warrant dedicated biomarker enhanced clinical trials.