Santiago‐Jiménez, María

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.

142 Background: Despite documented oncological benefit, postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) utilization in prostate cancer (PCa) patients is still limited in the US. We aimed to develop and internally validate a risk stratification tool incorporating the Decipher score, along with routinely available clinicopathologic features, to identify patients who would benefit the most from aRT. Methods: Our cohort included a total of 512 PCa patients treated with RP at one of four US academic centers between 1990-2010. All patients had ≥ pT3a disease, positive margins, and/or pathologic lymph node invasion (LNI). Multivariable Cox regression analysis (MVA) tested the relationship between available predictors (including Decipher score) and clinical recurrence (CR), which were then used to develop a novel risk stratification tool. Our study adhered to the TRIPOD guidelines for development of prognostic models. Results: Overall, 21.9% patients received aRT. Median follow-up in censored patients was 8.3 years. The 10-year CR rate was 4.9% vs. 17.4% in patients treated with aRT vs. initial observation (p < 0.001). Pathological T3b/T4 stage, Gleason score 8-10, LNI and Decipher score > 0.6 were independent predictors of CR (all p < 0.01) Cumulative number of risk factors was 0, 1, 2, and 3-4 in respectively 46.5, 28.9, 17.2, and 7.4% of patients. Adjuvant RT was associated with decreased CR rate in patients with ≥ 2 risk factors (10-year CR rate 10.1% in aRT vs. 42.1% in initial observation, p = 0.008), but not in those with < 2 risk factors (p = 0.23). Conclusions: Utilizing the novel model to indicate aRT might reduce overtreatment, decrease unnecessary side effects, and reduce risk of CR in the subset of patients (~25% of all patients with aggressive pathological disease) who really benefit from this therapy.

Purpose Despite documented oncologic benefit, use of postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) in patients with prostate cancer is still limited in the United States. We aimed to develop and internally validate a risk-stratification tool incorporating the Decipher score, along with routinely available clinicopathologic features, to identify patients who would benefit the most from aRT. Patient and Methods Our cohort included 512 patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy at one of four US academic centers between 1990 and 2010. All patients had ≥ pT3a disease, positive surgical margins, and/or pathologic lymph node invasion. Multivariable Cox regression analysis tested the relationship between available predictors (including Decipher score) and clinical recurrence (CR), which were then used to develop a novel risk-stratification tool. Our study adhered to the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis guidelines for development of prognostic models. Results Overall, 21.9% of patients received aRT. Median follow-up in censored patients was 8.3 years. The 10-year CR rate was 4.9% vs. 17.4% in patients treated with aRT versus initial observation ( P < .001). Pathologic T3b/T4 stage, Gleason score 8-10, lymph node invasion, and Decipher score > 0.6 were independent predictors of CR (all P < .01). The cumulative number of risk factors was 0, 1, 2, and 3 to 4 in 46.5%, 28.9%, 17.2%, and 7.4% of patients, respectively. aRT was associated with decreased CR rate in patients with two or more risk factors (10-year CR rate 10.1% in aRT v 42.1% in initial observation; P = .012), but not in those with fewer than two risk factors ( P = .18). Conclusion Using the new model to indicate aRT might reduce overtreatment, decrease unnecessary adverse effects, and reduce risk of CR in the subset of patients (approximately 25% of all patients with aggressive pathologic disease in our cohort) who benefit from this therapy.

Objectives To determine the prognostic potential of a 24‐gene signature, Sig24, for identifying patients with prostate cancer who are at risk of developing metastases or of prostate cancer‐specific mortality (PCSM) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Patients and Methods Sig24 scores were calculated from previously collected gene expression microarray data from the Cleveland Clinic and Mayo Clinic (I and II). The performance of Sig24 was determined using time‐dependent c‐index analysis, Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. Results Higher Sig24 scores were significantly associated with higher pathological Gleason scores in all three cohorts. Analysis of the Mayo Clinic II cohort, which included time‐to‐event information, indicated that patients with high Sig24 scores also had a higher risk of developing metastasis (hazard ratio [HR] 3.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.96–7.29; P < 0.001) or of PCSM (HR 6.54, 95% CI: 2.16–19.83; P < 0.001). Conclusions The findings of the present study show the applicability of Sig24 for the prognosis of metastasis or PCSM after RP. Future studies investigating the combination of Sig24 with available prognostic tests may provide new approaches to improve risk stratification for patients with prostate cancer.