Incorporation of tissue-based genomic biomarkers into localized prostate cancer clinics

被引:49
作者
Moschini, Marco [1 ]
Spahn, Martin [2 ]
Mattei, Agostino [3 ]
Cheville, John [4 ]
Karnes, R. Jeffrey [1 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Dept Urol, Rochester, MN USA
[2] Univ Hosp Bern, Inselspital, Dept Urol, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland
[3] Luzerner Kantonsspital, Urol Klin, Luzern, Switzerland
[4] Mayo Clin, Dept Lab Med & Pathol, Rochester, MN USA
来源
BMC MEDICINE | 2016年 / 14卷
关键词
Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Genetic tools; Decipher; Oncotype DX; Prolaris; PTEN PROTEIN LOSS; PROGNOSTIC VALUE; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; RISK STRATIFICATION; MUTATIONAL LANDSCAPE; GLEASON SCORE; BIOPSY; KI-67; PROGRESSION; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1186/s12916-016-0613-7
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Localized prostate cancer (PCa) is a clinically heterogeneous disease, which presents with variability in patient outcomes within the same risk stratification (low, intermediate or high) and even within the same Gleason scores. Genomic tools have been developed with the purpose of stratifying patients affected by this disease to help physicians personalize therapies and follow-up schemes. This review focuses on these tissue-based tools. At present, four genomic tools are commercially available: Decipher (TM), Oncotype DX (R), Prolaris (R) and ProMark (R). Decipher (TM) is a tool based on 22 genes and evaluates the risk of adverse outcomes (metastasis) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Oncotype DX (R) is based on 17 genes and focuses on the ability to predict outcomes (adverse pathology) in very low-low and low-intermediate PCa patients, while Prolaris (R) is built on a panel of 46 genes and is validated to evaluate outcomes for patients at low risk as well as patients who are affected by high risk PCa and post-RP. Finally, ProMark (R) is based on a multiplexed proteomics assay and predicts PCa aggressiveness in patients found with similar features to Oncotype DX (R). These biomarkers can be helpful for post-biopsy decision-making in low risk patients and post-radical prostatectomy in selected risk groups. Further studies are needed to investigate the clinical benefit of these new technologies, the financial ramifications and how they should be utilized in clinics.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 62 条
  • [1] Aaltomaa S, 2006, ANTICANCER RES, V26, P4873
  • [2] Clinical and genomic analysis of metastatic prostate cancer progression with a background of postoperative biochemical recurrence
    Alshalalfa, Mohammed
    Crisan, Anamaria
    Vergara, Ismael A.
    Ghadessi, Mercedeh
    Buerki, Christine
    Erho, Nicholas
    Yousefi, Kasra
    Sierocinski, Thomas
    Haddad, Zaid
    Black, Peter C.
    Karnes, R. Jeffrey
    Jenkins, Robert B.
    Davicioni, Elai
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2015, 116 (04) : 556 - 567
  • [3] The Mutational Landscape of Prostate Cancer
    Barbieri, Christopher E.
    Bangma, Chris H.
    Bjartell, Anders
    Catto, James W. F.
    Culig, Zoran
    Gronberg, Henrik
    Luo, Jun
    Visakorpi, Tapio
    Rubin, Mark A.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2013, 64 (04) : 567 - 576
  • [4] Enzalutamide in Metastatic Prostate Cancer before Chemotherapy REPLY
    Beer, Tomasz M.
    Tombal, Bertrand
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2014, 371 (18) : 1755 - 1756
  • [5] Prognostic Utility of the Cell Cycle Progression Score Generated from Biopsy in Men Treated with Prostatectomy
    Bishoff, Jay T.
    Freedland, Stephen J.
    Gerber, Leah
    Tennstedt, Pierre
    Reid, Julia
    Welbourn, William
    Graefen, Markus
    Sangale, Zaina
    Tikishvili, Eliso
    Park, Jimmy
    Younus, Adib
    Gutin, Alexander
    Lanchbury, Jerry S.
    Sauter, Guido
    Brawer, Michael
    Stone, Steven
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 192 (02) : 409 - 414
  • [6] Development and Clinical Validation of an In Situ Biopsy-Based Multimarker Assay for Risk Stratification in Prostate Cancer
    Blume-Jensen, Peter
    Berman, David M.
    Rimm, David L.
    Shipitsin, Michail
    Putzi, Mathew
    Nifong, Thomas P.
    Small, Clayton
    Choudhury, Sibgat
    Capela, Teresa
    Coupal, Louis
    Ernst, Christina
    Hurley, Aeron
    Kaprelyants, Alex
    Chang, Hua
    Giladi, Eldar
    Nardone, Julie
    Dunyak, James
    Loda, Massimo
    Klein, Eric A.
    Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina
    Latour, Mathieu
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    Kantoff, Philip
    Saad, Fred
    [J]. CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2015, 21 (11) : 2591 - 2600
  • [7] Genomic Predictors of Outcome in Prostate Cancer
    Bostrom, Peter J.
    Bjartell, Anders S.
    Catto, James W. F.
    Eggener, Scott E.
    Lilja, Hans
    Loeb, Stacy
    Schalken, Jack
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (06) : 1033 - 1044
  • [8] Inverse stage migration in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: results of 8916 European patients treated within the last decade
    Budaeus, Lars
    Spethmann, Jan
    Isbarn, Hendrik
    Schmitges, Jan
    Beesch, Laura
    Haese, Alexander
    Salomon, Georg
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    Fisch, Margit
    Heinzer, Hans
    Huland, Hartwig
    Graefen, Markus
    Steuber, Thomas
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 108 (08) : 1256 - 1261
  • [9] Cairns P, 1997, CANCER RES, V57, P4997
  • [10] Combined Value of Validated Clinical and Genomic Risk Stratification Tools for Predicting Prostate Cancer Mortality in a High-risk Prostatectomy Cohort
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    Davicioni, Elai
    Crisan, Anamaria
    Jenkins, Robert B.
    Ghadessi, Mercedeh
    Karnes, R. Jeffrey
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 67 (02) : 326 - 333