Adib Younus

Prognostic value of an RNA expression signature derived from cell cycle proliferation genes in patients with prostate cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND Optimum management of clinically localised prostate cancer presents unique challenges because of the highly variable and often indolent natural history of the disease. To predict disease aggressiveness, clinicians combine clinical variables to create prognostic models, but the models have limited accuracy. We assessed the prognostic value of a predefined cell cycle progression (CCP) score in two cohorts of patients with prostate cancer. METHODS We measured the expression of 31 genes involved in CCP with quantitative RT-PCR on RNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour samples, and created a predefined score and assessed its usefulness in the prediction of disease outcome. The signature was assessed retrospectively in a cohort of patients from the USA who had undergone radical prostatectomy, and in a cohort of randomly selected men with clinically localised prostate cancer diagnosed by use of a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the UK who were managed conservatively. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical recurrence for the cohort of patients who had radical prostatectomy, and time to death from prostate cancer for the TURP cohort. FINDINGS After prostatectomy, the CCP score was useful for predicting biochemical recurrence in the univariate analysis (hazard ratio for a 1-unit change [doubling] in CCP 1·89; 95% CI 1·54-2·31; p=5·6×10(-9)) and the best multivariate analysis (1·77, 1·40-2·22; p=4·3×10(-6)). In the best predictive model (final multivariate analysis), the CCP score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration were the most important variables and were more significant than any other clinical variable. In the TURP cohort, the CCP score was the most important variable for prediction of time to death from prostate cancer in both univariate analysis (2·92, 2·38-3·57, p=6·1×10(-22)) and the final multivariate analysis (2·57, 1·93-3·43; p=8·2×10(-11)), and was stronger than all other prognostic factors, although PSA concentration also added useful information. Heterogeneity in the hazard ratio for the CCP score was not noted in any case for any clinical variables. INTERPRETATION The results of this study provide strong evidence that the CCP score is a robust prognostic marker, which, after additional validation, could have an essential role in determining the appropriate treatment for patients with prostate cancer. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, Queen Mary University of London, Orchid Appeal, US National Institutes of Health, and Koch Foundation.

Prognostic value of a cell cycle progression signature for prostate cancer death in a conservatively managed needle biopsy cohort

Background:The natural history of prostate cancer is highly variable and it is difficult to predict. We showed previously that a cell cycle progression (CCP) score was a robust predictor of outcome in a conservatively managed cohort diagnosed by transurethral resection of the prostate. A greater need is to predict outcome in patients diagnosed by needle biopsy.Methods:Total RNA was extracted from paraffin specimens. A CCP score was calculated from expression levels of 31 genes. Clinical variables consisted of centrally re-reviewed Gleason score, baseline prostate-specific antigen level, age, clinical stage, and extent of disease. The primary endpoint was death from prostate cancer.Results:In univariate analysis (n=349), the hazard ratio (HR) for death from prostate cancer was 2.02 (95% CI (1.62, 2.53), P<10−9) for a one-unit increase in CCP score. The CCP score was only weakly correlated with standard prognostic factors and in a multivariate analysis, CCP score dominated (HR for one-unit increase=1.65, 95% CI (1.31, 2.09), P=3 × 10−5), with Gleason score (P=5 × 10−4) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (P=0.017) providing significant additional contributions.Conclusion:For conservatively managed patients, the CCP score is the strongest independent predictor of cancer death outcome yet described and may prove valuable in managing clinically localised prostate cancer.

Prognostic Utility of the Cell Cycle Progression Score Generated from Biopsy in Men Treated with Prostatectomy

PURPOSE The cell cycle progression score is associated with prostate cancer outcomes in various clinical settings. However, previous studies of men treated with radical prostatectomy evaluated cell cycle progression scores generated from resected tumor tissue. We evaluated the prognostic usefulness of the score derived from biopsy specimens in men treated with radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS We evaluated the cell cycle progression score in cohorts of patients from the Martini Clinic (283), Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center (176) and Intermountain Healthcare (123). The score was derived from simulated biopsy (Martini Clinic) or diagnostic biopsy (Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Intermountain Healthcare) and evaluated for an association with biochemical recurrence and metastatic disease. RESULTS In all 3 cohorts the cell cycle progression score was associated with biochemical recurrence and metastatic disease. The association with biochemical recurrence remained significant after adjusting for other prognostic clinical variables. On combined analysis of all cohorts (total 582 patients) the score was a strong predictor of biochemical recurrence on univariate analysis (HR per score unit 1.60, 95% CI 1.35-1.90, p=2.4×10(-7)) and multivariate analysis (HR per score unit 1.47, 95% CI 1.23-1.76, p=4.7×10(-5)). Although there were few events (12), the cell cycle progression score was the strongest predictor of metastatic disease on univariate analysis (HR per score unit 5.35, 95% CI 2.89-9.92, p=2.1×10(-8)) and after adjusting for clinical variables (HR per score unit 4.19, 95% CI 2.08-8.45, p=8.2×10(-6)). CONCLUSIONS The cell cycle progression score derived from a biopsy sample was associated with adverse outcomes after surgery. These results indicate that the score can be used at disease diagnosis to better define patient prognosis and enable more appropriate clinical care.

Prognostic utility of cell cycle progression score in men with prostate cancer after primary external beam radiation therapy.

PURPOSE To evaluate the prognostic utility of the cell cycle progression (CCP) score, a RNA signature based on the average expression level of 31 CCP genes, for predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR) in men with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) as their primary curative therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS The CCP score was derived retrospectively from diagnostic biopsy specimens of men diagnosed with prostate cancer from 1991 to 2006 (n=141). All patients were treated with definitive EBRT; approximately half of the cohort was African American. Outcome was time from EBRT to BCR using the Phoenix definition. Median follow-up for patients without BCR was 4.8 years. Association with outcome was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards survival analysis and likelihood ratio tests. RESULTS Of 141 patients, 19 (13%) had BCR. The median CCP score for patient samples was 0.12. In univariable analysis, CCP score significantly predicted BCR (P=.0017). The hazard ratio for BCR was 2.55 for 1-unit increase in CCP score (equivalent to a doubling of gene expression). In a multivariable analysis that included Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen, percent positive cores, and androgen deprivation therapy, the hazard ratio for CCP changed only marginally and remained significant (P=.034), indicating that CCP provides prognostic information that is not provided by standard clinical parameters. With 10-year censoring, the CCP score was associated with prostate cancer-specific mortality (P=.013). There was no evidence for interaction between CCP and any clinical variable, including ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS Among men treated with EBRT, the CCP score significantly predicted outcome and provided greater prognostic information than was available with clinical parameters. If validated in a larger cohort, CCP score could identify high-risk men undergoing EBRT who may need more aggressive therapy.

PTEN loss in biopsy tissue predicts poor clinical outcomes in prostate cancer

To determine whether PTEN status in prostate biopsy represents a predictor of intermediate and long‐term oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy, and whether PTEN status predicts response to androgen deprivation therapy.

Prognostic utility of CCP score in men with prostate cancer after primary external beam radiation therapy.

47 Background: Accurate risk stratification improves decision making in localized prostate cancer. The CCP score, a prognostic RNA signature based on the average expression level of 31 cell cycle progression (CCP) genes, was developed to aid in this task. Previously, the CCP score was shown to be predictive of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after prostatectomy, and prostate cancer specific mortality in men undergoing observation. However, the value of CCP score in men undergoing primary electron beam radiation therapy (EBRT) was untested. METHODS The CCP score was derived retrospectively from the diagnostic biopsy of 141 patients treated with EBRT at the Durham VA medical Center. Inclusion criteria were disease diagnosis from 1991 to 2006 and available biopsy tissue. Approximately half of the cohort was African-American. Outcome was time from EBRT to BCR using Phoenix definition, and median follow-up for patients without BCR was 4.8 years. Association with outcome was evaluated by CoxPH survival analysis and likelihood ratio tests. RESULTS Patient data were censored at 5-years of follow-up and 19 patients (13%) had BCR. The median CCP score was 0.12(IQR -0.43 to 0.66). In univariable analysis, CCP score was a significant prognostic variable (p-value = 0.0017). The hazard ratio (HR) for BCR was 2.55 (95% CI (1.43, 4.55)) for a one-unit increase in CCP score (equivalent to a doubling of gene expression). In a predefined multivariable analysis that included Gleason score, PSA, and percent positive cores, the HR for CCP changed only marginally and remained significant (HR per CCP unit 2.09 (95% CI (1.05, 4.18), p-value = 0.035), indicating that CCP provides prognostic information that is not provided by standard clinical parameters. Further adjustment for hormonal therapy or radiation dose did not materially alter this association. The score was also associated with prostate cancer specific mortality. There was no evidence for interaction between CCP and any clinical variable, including ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS In a cohort of men treated with EBRT, the CCP score was significantly associated with outcome and provided prognostic information beyond what was available from clinical parameters. If validated in a larger cohort, CCP score could be used to select high-risk men undergoing EBRT who may need combination therapy for their clinically localized prostate cancer.