Citations

516 Background: The impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is controversial. Herein, we evaluated the association of DM with survival among patients with RCC. Methods: We reviewed 2,589 patients treated with nephrectomy for sporadic, unilateral, M0 RCC between 1990 and 2008 and compared demographic and tumor characteristics in patients with and without DM (nonDM). Patients with DM (n=313) were matched 1:2 to nonDM patients according to date of surgery, age, smoking status, obesity, ECOG performance status (PS), CKD stage, histological subtype, and nuclear grade. Cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The association of DM with outcomes was evaluated with Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: A total of 313 (12%) patients had DM. DM patients were significantly older at RCC diagnosis, more likely to be obese, and had higher Charlson scores, CKD class, rates of smoking, and worse PS at surgery (p<0.001). Patients with DM were also more likely to have ccRCC (83% vs. 76%, p=0.02) and to undergo nephron-sparing surgery (42% vs. 35%, p=0.01), while other pathologic features were similar in DM and nonDM. Among the 939 matched cases and controls, 463 patients died within a median of 5.5 years after nephrectomy. Median follow-up for survivors was 8.6 years. Five-year CSS was not significantly different among DM patients 84% vs. nonDM patients 87% (p=0.11), although 5-year OS was significantly worse among DM patients (66% vs. 75%; p<0.001). Indeed, even after adjusting for Charlson score, DM patients were noted to have a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.33; p=0.004). In a subanalysis of patients with clear cell RCC, DM patients were more likely to die from RCC compared with nonDM patients after adjusting for the SSIGN (Stage, Size, Grade, Necrosis) score (HR 1.44; p=0.034). Conclusions: In this surgical cohort, DM was independently associated with decreased CSS among patients with ccRCC and with decreased OS in all RCC subtypes. Further studies to determine the potential biologic mechanism for this interaction are warranted.

402 Background: The American Urological Association (AUA) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) are highly utilized sources for surveillance strategies following surgical treatment for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, the duration of follow-up may be inadequate to capture the majority of recurrences. Herein, we assess the ability of these guidelines to effectively capture recurrences of RCC following primary surgical resection. Methods: We reviewed our institutional database of 3,725 patients treated with radical or partial nephrectomy for M0 sporadic RCC between 1970-2008. For comparison to the AUA guidelines, patients were stratified into low risk following partial nephrectomy (LRp) or radical nephrectomy (LRr) = pT1N0, and moderate/high risk (M/HR) = pT2-4 N0-1. Guideline effectiveness was assessed by calculating the percentage of recurrences detected within the prescribed follow-up periods given for site-specific recurrence: AUA—LRp: 3yrs for all sites; LRr: 1yr for abdominal and 3yrs for chest/bone/other sites; M/HR: 5yrs for all sites; NCCN—6 months for abdominal/chest sites and 5yrs for bone/other sites. Results: Of the 3,725 patients, 2721 (73.1%) underwent radical nephrectomy, 2,210 (59.3%) were classified as pT1 NX-0 and 2,910 (78.1%) as clear cell RCC. Median postoperative follow-up was 8.9yrs (IQR 5.5-14.2) during which 1,114 (29.9%) patients developed recurrence. Of these recurrences, 760 (68.2%) would have been detected using the AUA guidelines and 432 (38.8%) by NCCN recommendations. Within AUA risk groups, 37.2% recurrences were captured in LRp, 31.4% in LRr and 80.2% in M/HR. Capture of 90% of recurrences in the abdomen and chest would require surveillance for 9yrs and 8 yrs, respectively in LRp, 15yrs and 12yrs in LRr and 11yrs and 10yrs in M/HR. Conclusions: Duration of follow-up recommended by current surveillance algorithms by the AUA and NCCN do not adequately capture many recurrences in RCC following radical or partial nephrectomy. Guidelines using risk stratification and site-specific recurrence parameters to assign length of surveillance may allow providers to better individualize surveillance regimens.

97 Background: Optimal management of chronic medications is uncertain in life-limiting illness. To inform shared decision making, we assessed patient perceptions in a trial on the safety of discontinuing statins in life-limiting illness. Methods: Eligible adults (life expectancy 1–12 months, on statin for ≥ 3 months for primary/secondary prevention, recent functional decline, no active cardiovascular disease) were randomized to discontinue or continue statins and were followed monthly for up to 1 year. Cognitively intact participants were asked 9 questions regarding discontinuing statins prior to randomization. We used Pearson chi-square to compare responses between study groups and between those with and without cancer. Of 381 participants, 297 (78%) were cognitively intact (138 discontinued, 159 continued statins). Mean age was 72 years (SD 11) and mean number of medications used was 11.5 (SD 5.0); 58% (N = 173) had cancer. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the study groups in responses to the medication perception questions. Aggregate findings are presented (Table). Patients with cancer were less likely to think that they may be able to stop other medications (28% vs. 42%, p=0.007) and that statin discontinuation means that the doctor is giving up on them (1% vs. 7%, p=0.013). Conclusions: Few participants expressed concerns about discontinuing statins; many perceived potential benefits. Cancer patients may perceive less impact from stopping statins. Clinicians should inquire about patient concerns when engaging in shared decision making about discontinuing chronic medications in the setting of advanced cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT01415934. [Table: see text]

25 Background: Women with diabetes are at an increased risk of developing breast cancer, present with later stage disease, and experience higher breast cancer-specific mortality compared to nondiabetic women. Thus, it is imperative that diabetic women undergo routine screening mammography. Previous studies have shown conflicting results with smaller studies showing lower screening mammography rates among diabetics while a study using national self-report data showed that diabetic women were equally likely to be screened compared to nondiabetic women. Given the conflicting data and limitations of previous studies, we aimed to study receipt of mammography in diabetic women using a nationally representative administrative claims database. Methods: This was a retrospective study using a nationally representative administrative claims database from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012. We compared rates of receipt of mammography within a 2-year time frame in diabetic and nondiabetic women ages 40 to 64. We used Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) logic to define women with diabetes. We used CPT and ICD-9 codes to identify mammogram services received. We calculated odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals to compare mammogram rates among diabetics compared to nondiabetics. Results: 1,723,674 nondiabetic women and 133,973 diabetic women were identified. Among women ages 40 to 49, diabetic women had significantly decreased mammography rates compared to nondiabetic women (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.83, 0.85). Rates were also lower in diabetic women ages 50 to 64 (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.88, 0.91). Despite lower mammography rates among diabetics, diabetic women had 1.78 times more visits than nondiabetic women. Conclusions: Women with diabetes are less likely to undergo routine screening mammography than women without diabetes, despite having more encounters with health care providers. This study serves as a reminder to provide timely preventive health services to all patients regardless of medical comorbidities.

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.

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.

36 Background: Following radical prostatectomy (RP), 30-40% of patients have adverse pathology and are deemed at high risk for metastatic progression. The objective of this study was to validate the ability of Decipher, a genomic classifier (GC), to improve prediction of metastatic disease progression compared with clinical variables in order to better identify candidates for therapy intensification. Methods: A previously developed 22-feature GC model was validated in a prospectively designed case-cohort study of a clinically high-risk population (i.e., with one or more adverse pathological features) of 1,010 RP patients treated at Mayo Clinic between 2000-2006. A random sample of 20% of the cohort was subjected to microarray analysis and GC scores were generated for 219 patients. The primary endpoint, the c-index for predicting metastatic disease progression (i.e., positive bone or CT scans) was evaluated in a blinded analysis. Cox modeling and decision curve analyses were used to compare the performance of GC to individual clinical variables and prediction models. Results: GC had a c-index 0.79 (95% CI 0.71-0.86) that was significantly better than any single clinical variable. Cumulative incidence curves in the cohort showed that 72% of patients had low GC scores with only 3% and 6% incidence of metastatic disease at 5 and 10 years post RP. In contrast, for the 28% of patients with high GC scores, the cumulative incidence was 17% and 25% at 5 and 10 years post RP. Decision curve analysis showed that the GC model had higher overall net benefit compared to clinical variables over a wide range of ‘decision-to-treat’ thresholds for risk of metastasis. In multivariable modeling with clinicopathologic variables, GC remained the only significant independent predictor of metastasis (HR=1.51, for each 0.1 unit increment, p<0.001). Conclusions: GC can better predict metastatic disease progression compared with clinical variables and may select among patients with adverse pathology a majority that is in fact at low risk for metastasis.

359 Background: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is an aggressive form of RCC and is associated with a poor prognosis. Standard therapies tend to be less effective in this subset of patients. Methods: Using the Mayo Clinic Nephrectomy Registry, 206 patients with sarcomatoid RCC treated with partial or radical nephrectomy were identified. These patients were characterized based on extent of disease, treatment response and survival. Results: Of these 206, there was no evidence of distant metastases in 110 patients at the time of surgery and the estimated distant metastases-free survival at one year was 44%. The estimated cancer-specific survival rate at one and five years was 56% and 20%, respectively. Compared to patients with grade 4 RCC without sarcomatoid features, those with sarcomatoid RCC were more likely to develop distant metastases following surgery (hazard ratio 1.49). Considering those with metastatic sarcomatoid RCC, 96 patients had metastases at the time of surgery and 77 with no metastases at the time of surgery subsequently developed distant metastases (n=173). Of these, 156 died at a mean of 1.0 years from time of first evidence of distant metastases with a median cancer-specific survival of 0.6 years. Estimated cancer-specific survival rates from time of first metastases at one year and five years were 34% and 4%, respectively. The most common metastatic sites: lung (46%), bone (15%), liver (13%), non-regional lymph nodes (9%), and brain (5%). Patients who received targeted systemic therapy (10%) with either sunitinib (n=14), sorafenib (2) or pazopanib (1) for their first occurrence of distant metastases had an estimated cancer-specific survival rate at one year of 69%, compared to 30% for patients who did not. Median cancer-specific survival for those receiving targeted therapy as first-line was 2.2 years compared to 0.6 years for those patients who did not. Conclusions: Sarcomatoid RCC is an aggressive subtype of kidney cancer as evidenced by poor survival rates. The patients in this registry with metastatic sarcomatoid RCC who received targeted therapy as first-line treatment had improved cancer-specific survival rates.

8 Background: A number of biomarkers related to cell cycle, angiogenesis or apoptosis have been found to be associated with patient outcome in tissue samples from men treated with first line radiation therapy in RTOG clinical trials using immunohistochemical staining and analysis. In a prior study, four biomarkers (Ki-67, MDM2, p16 and Cox-2) and clinical covariates were included in a model of distant metastasis (DM; Pollack et al, Clin Cancer Res, 2014 [epub ahead of print]) risk. The current study tested the hypothesis that these genes are prognostic for DM in men treated primarily with total prostatectomy using RNA expression profiling. Methods: RNA fromprostatectomy samples from Cleveland Clinic (CC, n=182); Mayo Clinic (MC)-I (n = 545) and II (n=235); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC, n=131); Erasmus Medical Center (EMC, n=48) and Thomas Jefferson University (TJU, n=130) were profiled using 1.4 million RNA features. A Cox proportional hazards model was built on the MC-I training set to combine the 4 biomarkers into a prognostic risk score (4BMSig). 4BMSig was subsequently evaluated for its prognostic significance separately and in combination with clinical risk factors (biopsy Gleason Score, cT-category and Preop-PSA) for DM. Results: 4BMSig was found to discriminate DM patients significantly for the MC-II (AUC = 0.66, p < 0.001), CCF (AUC = 0.68, p < 0.001), and MSKCC (AUC = 0.71, p = 0.04) datasets, and achieved borderline significance for EMC (AUC = 0.70, p = 0.06). 4BMSig did not discriminate DM in the TJU dataset (only 10 DM events). Pooled multivariable analysis (n = 726) with clinical covariates revealed that 4BMSig is a strong independent prognostic covariate for DM (p < 0.001) and prostate cancer specific mortality (p = 0.005). Conclusions: The four genes identified previously as being associated with DM in radiotherapy patients were incorporated herein into 4BMSig, which was found to have potential as a pretreatment prognostic DM risk assessment tool for men treated with prostatectomy. Further validation would consist of testing 4BMSig from RNA in diagnostic tissue from prostate cancer patients prior to prostatectomy.

494 Background: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with rhabdoid differentiation is thought to portend a poor prognosis, similar to RCC with sarcomatoid differentiation. Both rhabdoid and sarcomatoid differentiation are classified as grade 4 RCC based on the most recent International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system. We sought to determine the prognostic value of rhabdoid differentiation in comparison to RCC with sarcomatoid differentiation, grade 4 RCC without rhabdoid or sarcomatoid differentiation, and grade 3 RCC. Methods: Using the Mayo Clinic Nephrectomy Registry, we identified 406 patients with ISUP grade 4 RCC and 1,758 patients with grade 3 RCC. A urologic pathologist reviewed all specimens to determine the presence of both rhabdoid and sarcomatoid differentiation. Associations of clinical and pathologic features with death from RCC were evaluated using Cox models. Results: Among the 406 grade 4 RCC tumors, 111 (27%) had rhabdoid differentiation and 189 (47%) had sarcomatoid differentiation, although only 28 (7%) demonstrated both rhabdoid and sarcomatoid differentiation. In multivariable analysis of grade 4 RCC tumors, the presence of rhabdoid differentiation was not associated with death from RCC (HR 0.95, p=0.75); in contrast, sarcomatoid differentiation was significantly associated with death from RCC (HR 1.63, p<0.001). Patients with RCC with rhabdoid differentiation were significantly more likely to die of RCC than patients with grade 3 RCC (HR 2.45, p<0.001) and grade 3 RCC with necrosis (HR 1.62; p<0.001). Conclusions: This study confirms that RCC with rhabdoid differentiation is appropriately classified as grade 4. However, unlike sarcomatoid differentiation, the presence of rhabdoid differentiation in grade 4 RCC is not associated with an increased risk of death from RCC. Therefore, rhabdoid and sarcomatoid differentiation should not be grouped together when assessing risk in a patient with grade 4 RCC.