Validation of a Genomic Classifier for Predicting Post-Prostatectomy Recurrence in a Community Based Health Care Setting
We determined the value of Decipher®, a genomic classifier, to predict prostate cancer outcomes among patients after prostatectomy in a community health care setting.
Materials and Methods:
We examined the experience of 224 men treated with radical prostatectomy from 1997 to 2009 at Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a large prepaid health plan in Portland, Oregon. Study subjects had aggressive prostate cancer with at least 1 of several criteria such as preoperative prostate specific antigen 20 ng/ml or greater, pathological Gleason score 8 or greater, stage pT3 disease or positive surgical margins at prostatectomy. The primary end point was clinical recurrence or metastasis after surgery evaluated using a time dependent c-index. Secondary end points were biochemical recurrence and salvage treatment failure. We compared the performance of Decipher alone to the widely used CAPRA-S (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical) score, and assessed the independent contributions of Decipher, CAPRA-S and their combination for the prediction of recurrence and treatment failure.
Of the 224 patients treated 12 experienced clinical recurrence, 68 had biochemical recurrence and 34 experienced salvage treatment failure. At 10 years after prostatectomy the recurrence rate was 2.6% among patients with low Decipher scores but 13.6% among those with high Decipher scores (p=0.02). When CAPRA-S and Decipher scores were considered together, the discrimination accuracy of the ROC curve was increased by 0.11 compared to the CAPRA-S score alone (combined c-index 0.84 at 10 years after radical prostatectomy) for clinical recurrence.
Decipher improves our ability to predict clinical recurrence in prostate cancer and adds precision to conventional pathological prognostic measures.
- 1 : Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin2015; 65: 5. Google Scholar
- 2 : Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol2011; 185: 869. Link, Google Scholar
- 3 : Genomic predictors of outcome in prostate cancer. Eur Urol2015; 68: 1033. Google Scholar
- 4 : Which, when and why? Rational use of tissue-based molecular testing in localized prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis2016; 19: 1. Google Scholar
- 5 : Validation of a genomic classifier that predicts metastasis following radical prostatectomy in an at risk patient population. J Urol2013; 190: 2047. Link, Google Scholar
- 6 : Genomic classifier identifies men with adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy who benefit from adjuvant radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol2015; 33: 944. Google Scholar
- 7 : A genomic classifier improves prediction of metastatic disease within 5 years after surgery in node-negative high-risk prostate cancer patients managed by radical prostatectomy without adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol2015; 67: 778. Google Scholar
- 8 : Tissue-based genomics augments post-prostatectomy risk stratification in a natural history cohort of intermediate- and high-risk men. Eur Urol2016; 69: 157. Google Scholar
- 9 : The CAPRA-S score: a straightforward tool for improved prediction of outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Cancer2011; 117: 5039. Google Scholar
- 10 : Utility of risk models in decision making after radical prostatectomy: lessons from a natural history cohort of intermediate- and high-risk men. Eur Urol2016; 69: 496. Google Scholar
- 11 : Exon array data analysis using Affymetrix power tools and R statistical software. Brief Bioinform2011; 12: 634. Google Scholar
- 12 : A single-sample microarray normalization method to facilitate personalized-medicine workflows. Genomics2012; 100: 337. Google Scholar
- 13 : Discovery and validation of a prostate cancer genomic classifier that predicts early metastasis following radical prostatectomy. PLoS One2013; 8: e66855. Google Scholar
- 14 Choeurng V, Luo B, Yousefi K et al: Re-calibration of genomic risk prediction models in prostate cancer to improve individual-level predictions. Presented at 2015 Joint Statistical Meetings, Seattle, Washington, August 8-13, 2015. Google Scholar
- 15 : Pivotal evaluation of the accuracy of a biomarker used for classification or prediction: standards for study design. J Natl Cancer Inst2008; 100: 1432. Google Scholar
- 16 : REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Br J Cancer2005; 93: 387. Google Scholar
- 17 : Time-dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker. Biometrics2000; 56: 337. Google Scholar
- 18 : Extensions to decision curve analysis, a novel method for evaluating diagnostic tests, prediction models and molecular markers. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak2008; 8: 53. Google Scholar
- 19 : Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika1993; 80: 27. Google Scholar
- 20 : Absolute risk regression for competing risks: interpretation, link functions, and prediction. Stat Med2012; 31: 3921. Google Scholar
- 21 : Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement. J Clin Oncol2014; 32: 3892. Google Scholar
- 22 : Genomic prostate cancer classifier predicts biochemical failure and metastases in patients after postoperative radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys2014; 89: 1038. Google Scholar
- 23 : Novel biomarker signature that may predict aggressive disease in African American men with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol2015; 33: 2789. Google Scholar