Background and purpose

Some studies have reported associations between intracranial atherosclerosis and Alzheimer disease pathology. We aimed to correlate severity of cerebral atherosclerosis, arteriolosclerosis, and cerebral amyloid angiopathy with neurofibrillary tangles, neuritic plaques, and cerebral infarcts.

Methods

This autopsy study (n=163) was drawn from a longitudinal study of subcortical ischemic vascular disease, Alzheimer disease, and normal aging. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to test associations among the 3 forms of cerebrovascular disease and the presence of ischemic and neurodegenerative brain lesions. Apolipoprotein E genotype was included as a covariate in these multivariable models.

Results

Cerebral atherosclerosis was positively associated with microinfarcts (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-4.4) and cystic infarcts (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-4.2) but not Alzheimer disease pathology. Arteriolosclerosis showed a positive correlation with lacunar infarcts (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-4.2) but not Alzheimer disease pathology. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy was inversely associated with lacunar infarcts (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.41-1.1), but positively associated with Braak and Braak stage (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1) and Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer Disease plaque score (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2).

Conclusions

Microinfarcts, which have been correlated with severity of cognitive impairment, were most strongly associated with atherosclerosis. Possible pathogenetic mechanisms include artery-to-artery emboli, especially microemboli that may include atheroemboli or platelet-fibrin emboli. Arteriolosclerosis was positively, whereas cerebral amyloid angiopathy was negatively correlated with lacunar infarcts, which might prove helpful in clinical differentiation of arteriolosclerotic from cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related vascular brain injury.

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare cutaneous neuroendocrine neoplasm of possible viral origin and is known for its aggressive behavior. The incidence of MCC has increased in the last 15 years. Merkel cell carcinoma has the potential to metastasize, but rarely involves the central nervous system. Herein, we report three consecutive surgical cases of MCC presenting at a single institution within 1 year. We used intracavitary BCNU wafers (Gliadel(®)) in two cases. Pathological features, including CK20 positivity, consistent with MCC, were present in all cases. We found 33 published cases of MCC with CNS involvement. We suggest that the incidence of neurometastatic MCC may be increasing, parallel to the increasing incidence of primary MCC. We propose a role for intracavitary BCNU wafers in the treatment of intra-axial neurometastatic MCC.

PURPOSE: Outcomes in patients who enroll in active surveillance programs for prostate cancer while receiving 5α-reductase inhibitors have not been well defined. We sought to determine the association of 5α-reductase inhibitor use with the risk of reclassification in the PASS (Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants in the multicenter PASS were enrolled between 2008 and 2016. Study inclusion criteria were current or never 5α-reductase inhibitors use, Gleason score 3 + 4 or less prostate cancer at diagnosis, less than a 34% core involvement ratio at diagnosis and 1 or more surveillance biopsies. Included in study were 1,009 men, including 107 on 5α-reductase inhibitors and 902 who had never received 5α-reductase inhibitors. Reclassification was defined as increase in the Gleason score and/or an increase to 34% or greater in the ratio of biopsy cores positive for cancer. Adverse pathology at prostatectomy was defined as Gleason 4 + 3 or greater and/or nonorgan confined disease (pT3 or N1). RESULTS: On multivariable analysis there was no difference in reclassification between men who had received and those who had never received 5α-reductase inhibitors (HR 0.81, p = 0.31). Patients who had received 5α-reductase inhibitors were less likely to undergo radical prostatectomy (8% vs 18%, p = 0.01) or any definitive treatment (19% vs 24%, p = 0.04). In the 167 participants who underwent radical prostatectomy there was no suggestion of a difference in the rate of adverse pathology findings at prostatectomy between 5α-reductase inhibitor users and nonusers. CONCLUSIONS: Continued 5α-reductase inhibitor use after an initial diagnosis of prostate cancer was not associated with the risk of reclassification on active surveillance in men in the PASS cohort.

PURPOSE: We assessed whether Prostate Health Index results improve prediction of grade reclassification for men on active surveillance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We identified men in Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study with Grade Group 1 cancer. Outcome was grade reclassification to Grade Group 2+ cancer. We considered decision rules to maximize specificity with sensitivity set at 95%. We derived rules based on clinical data (R1) vs clinical data+Prostate Health Index (R3). We considered an or-logic rule combining clinical score and Prostate Health Index (R4), and a 2-step rule using clinical data followed by risk stratification based on Prostate Health Index (R2). Rules were applied to a validation set, where values of R2-R4 vs R1 for specificity and sensitivity were evaluated. RESULTS: We included 1,532 biopsies (n = 610 discovery; n = 922 validation) among 1,142 men. Grade reclassification was seen in 27% of biopsies (23% discovery, 29% validation). Among the discovery set, at 95% sensitivity, R2 yielded highest specificity at 27% vs 17% for R1. In the validation set, R3 had best performance vs R1 with Δsensitivity = -4% and Δspecificity = +6%. There was slight improvement for R3 vs R1 for confirmatory biopsy (AUC 0.745 vs R1 0.724, ΔAUC 0.021, 95% CI 0.002-0.041) but not for subsequent biopsies (ΔAUC -0.012, 95% CI -0.031-0.006). R3 did not have better discrimination vs R1 among the biopsy cohort overall (ΔAUC 0.007, 95% CI -0.007-0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Among active surveillance patients, using Prostate Health Index with clinical data modestly improved prediction of grade reclassification on confirmatory biopsy and did not improve prediction on subsequent biopsies.

Modifiable lifestyle factors, such as following a healthy dietary pattern may delay or prevent prostate cancer (PCa) progression. However, few studies have evaluated whether following specific dietary patterns after PCa diagnosis impacts risk of disease progression among men with localized PCa managed by active surveillance (AS). 564 men enrolled in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study, a protocol-driven AS study utilizing a pre-specified prostate-specific antigen monitoring and surveillance biopsy regimen, completed a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) at enrollment and had ≥ 1 surveillance biopsy during follow-up. FFQs were used to evaluate adherence to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (Healthy Eating index (HEI))-2015, alternative Mediterranean Diet (aMED), and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) dietary patterns. Multivariable-adjusted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. During a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 237 men experienced an increase in Gleason score on subsequent biopsy (grade reclassification). Higher HEI-2015, aMED or DASH diet scores after diagnosis were not associated with significant reductions in the risk of grade reclassification during AS. However, these dietary patterns have well-established protective effects on chronic diseases and mortality and remain a prudent choice for men with prostate cancer managed by AS.

Purpose

During active surveillance for localized prostate cancer, the timing of the first surveillance biopsy varies. We analyzed the Canary PASS (Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Study) to determine biopsy timing influence on rates of prostate cancer adverse reclassification at the first active surveillance biopsy.

Materials and methods

Of 1,085 participants in PASS, 421 had fewer than 34% of cores involved with cancer and Gleason sum 6 or less, and thereafter underwent on-study active surveillance biopsy. Reclassification was defined as an increase in Gleason sum and/or 34% or more of cores with prostate cancer. First active surveillance biopsy reclassification rates were categorized as less than 8, 8 to 13 and greater than 13 months after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression determined association between reclassification and first biopsy timing.

Results

Of 421 men, 89 (21.1%) experienced reclassification at the first active surveillance biopsy. Median time from prostate cancer diagnosis to first active surveillance biopsy was 11 months (IQR 7.8-13.8). Reclassification rates at less than 8, 8 to 13 and greater than 13 months were 24%, 19% and 22% (p = 0.65). On multivariable analysis, compared to men biopsied at less than 8 months the OR of reclassification at 8 to 13 and greater than 13 months were 0.88 (95% CI 0.5,1.6) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.5,1.9), respectively. Prostate specific antigen density 0.15 or greater (referent less than 0.15, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1, 4.1) and body mass index 35 kg/m² or greater (referent less than 25 kg/m², OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1,5.7) were associated with increased odds of reclassification.

Conclusions

Timing of the first active surveillance biopsy was not associated with increased adverse reclassification but prostate specific antigen density and body mass index were. In low risk patients on active surveillance, it may be reasonable to perform the first active surveillance biopsy at a later time, reducing the overall cost and morbidity of active surveillance.

Background

Pathogenic germline mutations in several rare penetrant cancer predisposition genes are associated with an increased risk of aggressive prostate cancer (PC). Our objectives were to determine the prevalence of pathogenic germline mutations in men with low-risk PC on active surveillance, and assess whether pathogenic germline mutations associate with grade reclassification or adverse pathology, recurrence, or metastases, in men treated after initial surveillance.

Methods

Men prospectively enrolled in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study (PASS) were retrospectively sampled for the study. Germline DNA was sequenced utilizing a hereditary cancer gene panel. Mutations were classified according to the American College of Clinical Genetics and Genomics' guidelines. The association of pathogenic germline mutations with grade reclassification and adverse characteristics was evaluated by weighted Cox proportional hazards modeling and conditional logistic regression, respectively.

Results

Overall, 29 of 437 (6.6%) study participants harbored a pathogenic germline mutation of which 19 occurred in a gene involved in DNA repair (4.3%). Eight participants (1.8%) had pathogenic germline mutations in three genes associated with aggressive PC: ATM, BRCA1, and BRCA2. The presence of pathogenic germline mutations in DNA repair genes did not associate with adverse characteristics (univariate analysis HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.36-2.06, p = 0.7). The carrier rates of pathogenic germline mutations in ATM, BRCA1, and BRCA2did not differ in men with or without grade reclassification (1.9% vs. 1.8%).

Conclusion

The frequency of pathogenic germline mutations in penetrant cancer predisposition genes is extremely low in men with PC undergoing active surveillance and pathogenic germline mutations had no apparent association with grade reclassification or adverse characteristics.

Background

Men on active surveillance (AS) face repeated biopsies. Most biopsy specimens will not show disease progression or change management. Such biopsies do not contribute to patient management and are potentially morbid and costly.

Objective

To use a contemporary AS prospective trial to develop a tool to predict AS biopsy outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants

Biopsy samples (median: 2; range: 2-9 per patient) from 859 men participating in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study and with Gleason 6 prostate cancer (median follow-up: 35.8 mo; range: 3.0-148.7 mo) were analyzed.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Logistic regression was used to predict progression, defined as an increase in Gleason score from ≤6 to ≥7 or increase in percentage of cores positive for cancer from <34% to ≥34%. Fivefold internal cross-validation was performed to evaluate the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results and limitations

Statistically significant risk factors for progression on biopsy were prostate-specific antigen (odds ratio [OR]: 1.045; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.028-1.063), percentage of cores positive for cancer on most recent biopsy (OR: 1.401; 95% CI, 1.301-1.508), and history of at least one prior negative biopsy (OR: 0.524; 95% CI, 0.417-0.659). A multivariable predictive model incorporating these factors plus age and number of months since last biopsy achieved an AUC of 72.4%.

Conclusions

A combination of readily available clinical measures can stratify patients considering AS prostate biopsy. Risk of progression or upgrade can be estimated and incorporated into clinical practice.

Patient summary

The Canary-Early Detection Research Network Active Surveillance Biopsy Risk Calculator, an online tool, can be used to guide patient decision making regarding follow-up prostate biopsy.

Background

Diagnosis of Gleason 6 prostate cancer can leave uncertainty about the presence of undetected aggressive disease.

Objective

To evaluate the utility of a four kallikrein (4K) panel in predicting the presence of high-grade cancer in men on active surveillance.

Design, setting, and participants

Plasma collected before the first and subsequent surveillance biopsies was assessed for 718 men prospectively enrolled in the multi-institutional Canary PASS trial. Biopsy data were split 2:1 into training and test sets. We developed statistical models that included clinical information and either the 4Kpanel or serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA).

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The endpoint was reclassification to Gleason ≥7. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses and area under the curve (AUC) to assess discriminatory capacity, and decision curve analysis (DCA) to report clinical net benefit.

Results and limitations

Significant predictors for reclassification were 4Kpanel (odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-1.81) or PSA (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.53-2.91), ≥20% cores positive (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.33-3.32), two or more prior negative biopsies (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.85), prostate volume (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31-0.70), and body mass index (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14). ROC curve analysis comparing 4K and base models indicated that the 4Kpanel improved accuracy for predicting reclassification (AUC 0.78 vs 0.74) at the first surveillance biopsy. Both models performed comparably for prediction of reclassification at subsequent biopsies (AUC 0.75 vs 0.76). In DCA, both models showed higher net benefit compared to biopsy-all and biopsy-none strategies. Limitations include the single cohort nature of the study and the small numbers; results should be validated in another cohort before clinical use.

Conclusions

The 4Kpanel provided incremental value over routine clinical information in predicting high-grade cancer in the first biopsy after diagnosis. The 4Kpanel did not add predictive value to the base model at subsequent surveillance biopsies.

Patient summary

Active surveillance is a management strategy for many low-grade prostate cancers. Repeat biopsies monitor for previously undetected high-grade cancer. We show that a model with clinical variables, including a panel of four kallikreins, indicates the presence of high-grade cancer before a biopsy is performed.

Purpose

We investigated the ability of prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater cancer in a standardized, multi-institutional active surveillance cohort.

Materials and methods

We evaluated men enrolled in Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study with Gleason Grade Group less than 2 and who underwent biopsy within 12 months of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Our primary outcome was biopsy reclassification to Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater. We evaluated the performance of magnetic resonance imaging PI-RADS® score and clinical factors. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit with magnetic resonance imaging and clinical factors and used to perform receiver operating curve analyses.

Results

There were 361 participants with 395 prostate magnetic resonance imaging studies with a median followup of 4.1 (IQR 2.0-7.6) years. Overall 108 (27%) biopsies showed reclassification. Defining positive magnetic resonance imaging as PI-RADS 3-5, the negative predictive value and positive predictive value for detecting Gleason Grade Group 2 or greater cancer was 83% (95% CI 76-90) and 31% (95% CI 26-37), respectively. PI-RADS was significantly associated with reclassification (PI-RADS 5 vs 1 and 2 OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.21-6.17, p=0.016) in a multivariable model but did not improve upon a model with only clinical factors (AUC 0.768 vs 0.762). In 194 fusion biopsies higher grade cancer was found in targeted cores in 21 (11%) instances, while 25 (13%) had higher grade cancer in the systematic cores.

Conclusions

This study adds the largest cohort data to the body of literature for magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance, recommending systematic biopsy in patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging and the inclusion of systematic biopsy in patients with positive magnetic resonance imaging.