Morgan, Todd M.

Abstract Purpose: The heterogeneity of androgen receptor (AR)-activity (AR-A) is well-characterized in heavily treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, the diversity and clinical implications of AR-A in treatment-naïve primary prostate cancer is largely unknown. We sought to characterize AR-A in localized prostate cancer and understand its molecular and clinical implications. Experimental Design: Genome-wide expression profiles from prostatectomy or biopsy samples from 19,470 patients were used, all with independent pathology review. This was comprised of prospective discovery (n = 5,239) and validation (n = 12,728) cohorts, six retrospective institutional cohorts with long-term clinical outcomes data (n = 1,170), and The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 333). Results: A low AR-active subclass was identified, which comprised 9%–11% of each cohort, and was characterized by increased immune signaling, neuroendocrine expression, and decreased DNA repair. These tumors were predominantly ERG and basal subtype. Low AR-active tumors had significantly more rapid development of recurrence or metastatic disease across cohorts, which was maintained on multivariable analysis [HR, 2.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22–5.60; P = 0.014]. Low AR-active tumors were predicted to be more sensitive to PARP inhibition, platinum chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, and less sensitive to docetaxel and androgen-deprivation therapy. This was validated clinically, in that low AR-active tumors were less sensitive to androgen-deprivation therapy (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21–0.80; P = 0.008). Conclusions: Leveraging large-scale transcriptomic data allowed the identification of an aggressive subtype of treatment-naïve primary prostate cancer that harbors molecular features more analogous to mCRPC. This suggests that a preexisting subgroup of patients may have tumors that are predisposed to fail multiple current standard-of-care therapies and warrant dedicated therapeutic investigation.

PURPOSE Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is used widely for prostate cancer (PCa) evaluation. Approximately 35% of aggressive tumors, however, are not visible on mpMRI. We sought to identify the molecular alterations associated with mpMRI-invisible tumors and determine whether mpMRI visibility is associated with PCa prognosis. METHODS Discovery and validation cohorts included patients who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy and were found to harbor both mpMRI-visible (Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System 3 to 5) and -invisible (Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System 1 or 2) foci on surgical pathology. Next-generation sequencing was performed to determine differential gene expression between mpMRI-visible and -invisible foci. A genetic signature for tumor mpMRI visibility was derived in the discovery cohort and assessed in an independent validation cohort. Its association with long-term oncologic outcomes was evaluated in a separate testing cohort. RESULTS The discovery cohort included 10 patients with 26 distinct PCa foci on surgical pathology, of which 12 (46%) were visible and 14 (54%) were invisible on preoperative mpMRI. Next-generation sequencing detected prioritized genetic mutations in 14 (54%) tumor foci (n = 8 mpMRI visible, n = 6 mpMRI invisible). A nine-gene signature (composed largely of cell organization/structure genes) associated with mpMRI visibility was derived (area under the curve = 0.89), and the signature predicted MRI visibility with 75% sensitivity and 100% specificity (area under the curve = 0.88) in the validation cohort. In the testing cohort (n = 375, median follow-up 8 years) there was no significant difference in biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis, or cancer-specific mortality in patients with predicted mpMRI-visible versus -invisible tumors (all P > .05). CONCLUSION Compared with mpMRI-invisible disease, mpMRI-visible tumors are associated with underexpression of cellular organization genes. mpMRI visibility does not seem to be predictive of long-term cancer outcomes, highlighting the need for biopsy strategies that detect mpMRI-invisible tumors.

Purpose In April 2017, the American Urological Association, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Urologic Oncology released a joint evidence-based practice guideline on clinically localized prostate cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. Methods The Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Expert Panel then reviewed the content and the recommendations. Results The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer guideline were clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer guideline except for two recommendations on cryosurgery. The two recommendations covering cryosurgery were not endorsed because the panel found that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of cryotherapy in this setting. Recommendations The ASCO Expert Panel endorsed all but two of the original guideline recommendations as written and offered a series of discussion points to guide practice.

Abstract The trend toward precision-based therapeutic approaches dictated by molecular alterations offers substantial promise for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, current approaches for molecular characterization are primarily tissue based, necessitating serial biopsies to understand changes over time and are limited by the challenges inherent to extracting genomic material from predominantly bone metastases. Therefore, a circulating tumor cell (CTC)-based assay was developed to determine gene expression across a panel of clinically relevant and potentially actionable prostate cancer–related genes. CTCs were isolated from the whole blood of mCRPC patients (n = 41) and multiplex qPCR was performed to evaluate expression of prostate cancer–related target genes (n = 78). A large fraction of patients (27/41, 66%) had detectable CTCs. Increased androgen receptor (AR) expression (70% of samples) and evidence of Wnt signaling (67% of samples) were observed. The TMPRSS2:ERG fusion was expressed in 41% of samples, and the aggressive prostate cancer–associated long noncoding RNA SChLAP1 was upregulated in 70%. WNT5a [HR 3.62, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.63–8.05, P = 0.002], AURKA (HR 5.56, 95% CI, 1.79–17.20, P = 0.003), and BMP7 (HR 3.86, 95% CI, 1.60–9.32, P = 0.003) were independently predictive of overall survival (FDR < 10%) after adjusting for a panel of previously established prognostic variables in mCRPC (Halabi nomogram). A model including Halabi, WNT5a, and AURKA expression, termed the miCTC score, outperformed the Halabi nomogram alone (AUC = 0.89 vs. AUC = 0.70). Understanding the molecular landscape of CTCs has utility in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with aggressive prostate cancer and provides an additional tool in the arsenal of precision-based therapeutic approaches in oncology. Implications: Analysis of CTC gene expression reveals a clinically prognostic “liquid biopsy” signature in patients with metastatic castrate-resistance prostate cancer. Mol Cancer Res; 16(4); 643–54. ©2018 AACR.