Clinical and Genomic Differences Between Advanced Molecular Imaging-detected and Conventional Imaging-detected Metachronous Oligometastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer

Philip Sutera; Yang Song; Kim Van der Eecken; Amol C Shetty; Keara English; Theresa Hodges; Jinhee Chang; Valérie Fonteyne; Zaker Rana; Lei Ren; Adrianna A Mendes; Nicolaas Lumen; Louke Delrue; Sofie Verbeke; Kathia De Man; Daniel Y Song; Kenneth Pienta; Felix Y Feng; Steven Joniau; Tamara Lotan; Barton Lane; Ana Kiess; Steven Rowe; Martin Pomper; Theodore DeWeese; Matthew Deek; Christopher Sweeney; Piet Ost; Phuoc T Tran

doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.025

Clinical and Genomic Differences Between Advanced Molecular Imaging-detected and Conventional Imaging-detected Metachronous Oligometastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer

Eur Urol. 2023 Dec;84(6):531-535. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.025. Epub 2023 May 10.

Authors

Philip Sutera¹, Yang Song², Kim Van der Eecken³, Amol C Shetty², Keara English¹, Theresa Hodges², Jinhee Chang⁴, Valérie Fonteyne⁵, Zaker Rana⁴, Lei Ren⁴, Adrianna A Mendes⁶, Nicolaas Lumen⁵, Louke Delrue⁷, Sofie Verbeke⁸, Kathia De Man⁹, Daniel Y Song¹⁰, Kenneth Pienta¹¹, Felix Y Feng¹², Steven Joniau¹³, Tamara Lotan⁶, Barton Lane¹⁴, Ana Kiess¹, Steven Rowe¹⁵, Martin Pomper¹⁶, Theodore DeWeese¹, Matthew Deek¹⁷, Christopher Sweeney¹⁸, Piet Ost¹⁹, Phuoc T Tran²⁰

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
² Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
³ Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Pathology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
⁴ Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
⁵ Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium.
⁶ Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
⁷ Department of Radiology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
⁸ Department of Pathology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
⁹ Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
¹⁰ Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
¹¹ Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
¹² Departments of Medicine, Urology and Radiation Oncology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
¹³ Department of Radiation Oncology, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
¹⁴ Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
¹⁵ The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
¹⁶ Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
¹⁷ Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
¹⁸ South Australian Immunogenomics Cancer Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
¹⁹ Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Network, Antwerp, Belgium. Electronic address: piet.ost@ugent.be.
²⁰ Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: phuoc.tran@som.umaryland.edu.

PMID: 37173210
PMCID: PMC10636237 (available on 2024-12-01)
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.025

Abstract

In metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), disease volume plays an integral role in guiding treatment recommendations, including selection of docetaxel therapy, metastasis-directed therapy, and radiation to the prostate. Although there are multiple definitions of disease volume, they have commonly been studied in the context of metastases detected via conventional imaging (CIM). One such numeric definition of disease volume, termed oligometastasis, is heavily dependent on the sensitivity of the imaging modality. We performed an international multi-institutional retrospective review of men with metachronous oligometastatic CSPC (omCSPC), detected via either advanced molecular imaging alone (AMIM) or CIM. Patients were compared with respect to clinical and genomic features using the Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson's χ² test, and Kaplan-Meier overall survival (OS) analyses with a log-rank test. A total of 295 patients were included for analysis. Patients with CIM-omCSPC had significantly higher Gleason grade group (p = 0.032), higher prostate-specific antigen at omCSPC diagnosis (8.0 vs 1.7 ng/ml; p < 0.001), more frequent pathogenic TP53 mutations (28% vs 17%; p = 0.030), and worse 10-yr OS (85% vs 100%; p < 0.001). This is the first report of clinical and biological differences between AMIM-detected and CIM-detected omCSPC. Our findings are particularly important for ongoing and planned clinical trials in omCSPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Metastatic prostate cancer with just a few metastases only detected via newer scanning methods (called molecular imaging) is associated with fewer high-risk DNA mutations and better survival in comparison to metastatic cancer detected via conventional scan methods.

Keywords: Genomics; Molecular imaging; Oligometastatic prostate cancer.

Publication types

Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Castration
Docetaxel / therapeutic use
Genomics
Humans
Male
Molecular Imaging
Prostatic Neoplasms* / diagnostic imaging
Prostatic Neoplasms* / genetics
Prostatic Neoplasms* / therapy

Substances

Docetaxel

Abstract

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding