The PROFILE feasibility study: Genetic prostate cancer risk stratification for targeted screening.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 22-22
Author(s):  
Christos Mikropoulos ◽  
Elena Castro ◽  
Elizabeth Bancroft ◽  
Elizabeth Page ◽  
Natalie Taylor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Genetic Model ◽  
Cumulative Risk ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Prostatic Biopsy ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Targeted Screening

22 Background: Prostate cancer (PC) screening is controversial and a better assessment of individualized PC risk is needed. Several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) conferring a cumulative risk of PC have been identified. We have explored the potential role of genetic markers for targeted screening in a population with increased risk of PC due to family history (FH). Methods: PROFILE was developed as a pilot study to determine the feasibility of targeted PC screening using prostatic biopsy (PB) and its association with specific genetic profiles in men with FH. We also evaluated the role of PSA and Diffusion Weighted MRI (DW-MRI) as screening tools. One hundred sixteen men age 40 to 69 with FH of PC were enrolled between October 2009 and December 2012. Cumulative SNP risk scores were calculated by summing 59 risk alleles for each locus using the weighted effect (log-additive model). DW-MRI was performed in 50 patients. Participants were asked to undergo a 10 core PB regardless of baseline PSA. Results: Median age 53 (40 to 69) and median PSA was 1.15. One hundred and two men accepted to undergo a PB as primary PC screening. Twenty-three tumours were found (22.5% of biopsies) as well as seven men diagnosed with atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) (6.8%) and eight men with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HG-PIN) (7.8%). In total 37.1% received an abnormal result. Out of the diagnosed PC 41% were intermediate or high risk and requiring treatment, which compares with 24% in general population screening. The predictive performance of DW-MRI, PSA, genetic model and genetic model plus PSA measured by AUC were: 0.85, 0.73, 0.57 and 0.74, respectively. The genetic model performed best in men with a normal PSA of <3(AUC 0.63). Analyses of a 78 SNP profile from the recent COGS results are underway. Conclusions: Ourresults indicate that PB is acceptable for PC screening in men with FH of PC. The significant AUC for DW-MRI would warrant a larger study. The incidence of ASAP is higher in this group than the general population.The SNP risk score was more predictive in men with PSA less than three where PB would not normally be undertaken, therefore an expanded study to investigate the role of genetic profiling in directing PB in PC screening is indicated.

Profile study: Genetic prostate cancer risk stratification for targeted screening.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5054-5054
Author(s):  
Elena Castro ◽  
Elizabeth Bancroft ◽  
Natalie Taylor ◽  
Tokhir Dadaev ◽  
Elizabeth Page ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Genetic Model ◽  
Genetic Risk Score ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Severe Side Effect ◽  
Cancer Worry ◽  
Increased Risk

5054 Background: Prostate cancer (PC) screening is controversial and better approaches are needed, including a better assessment of individualized PC risk. Several studies have identified a number of common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that confer a cumulative risk of PC. We have explored the potential role of genetic markers in identifying men who should be selectively targeted for screening in a population with increased risk of PC due to family history (FH) of the disease. Methods: PROFILE has been developed as a pilot study. The primary aim is to determine the feasibility of targeted PC screening using prostatic biopsy (PB) and its association with specific genetic profiles in men with FH. Secondary aims are to evaluate the role of PSA and Diffusion Weighted MRI (DW-MRI) as screening tools in this population. From December 2010 men aged 40-69 with FH of PC were invited into the study until 100 men were enrolled. Blood samples were provided for PSA and DNA extraction. The cumulative SNP risk scores for each patient were calculated by summing 59 risk alleles for each locus using the weighted effect as estimated in previous studies (log-additive model). DW-MRI was performed in 50 patients. All participants were asked to undergo a 10 core PB regardless of baseline PSA. Those who declined PB have been excluded from this analysis. Data on side effects and cancer worry were also collected. Results: 35% of invited men entered the study. Median age was 53 yrs (40-69) and median PSA was 1.15. Ninety men accepted to undergo a PB as primary PC screening. Twenty-two tumours were found and 45% of them were clinically significant [Median age 64yrs (47-69), median PSA 5.4 (0.91-9.3)]. The predictive performance of DW-MRI, PSA, genetic model and genetic model plus PSA measured by AUC were: 0.85, 0.73, 0.57 and 0.74, respectively. The genetic model performed better in men with PSA<3(AUC 0.63). No severe side effect or adverse psychosocial variables were noted. Conclusions: Our results indicate that PB is acceptable as a means of PC screening in men with FH of PC. Overall, DW-MRI and PSA were more predictive of PC than the genetic risk score. As more SNPs are found, a larger study is warranted to evaluate their role in the PC screening algorithm.

scholarly journals CHEK2∗1100delC Mutation and Risk of Prostate Cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Hale ◽  
Maren Weischer ◽  
Jong Y. Park
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Conclusive Evidence ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
History Of ◽  
Cancer Studies

Although the causes of prostate cancer are largely unknown, previous studies support the role of genetic factors in the development of prostate cancer.CHEK2plays a critical role in DNA replication by responding to double-stranded breaks. In this review, we provide an overview of the current knowledge of the role of a genetic variant, 1100delC, ofCHEK2on prostate cancer risk and discuss the implication for potential translation of this knowledge into clinical practice. Currently, twelve articles that discussedCHEK2∗1100delC and its association with prostate cancer were identified. Of the twelve prostate cancer studies, five studies had independent data to draw conclusive evidence from. The pooled results of OR and 95% CI were 1.98 (1.23–3.18) for unselected cases and 3.39 (1.78–6.47) for familial cases, indicating thatCHEK2∗1100delC mutation is associated with increased risk of prostate cancer. Screening for CHEK2∗1100delC should be considered in men with a familial history of prostate cancer.

Germline heterozygous BLM mutations and prostate cancer risk.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 321-321
Author(s):  
Elisa Ledet ◽  
Emmanuel S. Antonarakis ◽  
Colin Pritchard ◽  
William B. Isaacs ◽  
A. Oliver Sartor
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Dna Sequencing ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Genetic Disorder ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Dna Helicase ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Increased Risk

321 Background: The BLM gene encodes a RecQ DNA helicase that is involved in homologous recombination. Biallelic BLM inactivation leads to Bloom syndrome, an inherited genetic disorder marked by chromosomal instability and multiple cancer susceptibilities. Conflicting studies have suggested that heterozygous BLM mutation carriers may have an increased risk of various cancers. Here we explored the role of germline pathogenic BLM mutations in prostate cancer. Methods: Prostate cancer patients with heterozygous BLM mutations were assembled from Tulane Cancer Center (TCC), Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) and University of Washington (UW). BLM germline mutations were identified either through commercial germline testing (Invitae), the UW-BROCA panel, or whole-exome sequencing. Corresponding tumor tissue was analyzed by DNA sequencing for somatic alterations. Population level control data were obtained from the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD). Results: 6 BLM germline carriers were identified among 985 advanced prostate cancer case; 2/295 TCC patients, 2/172 JHH patients, and 2/518 UW patients. Overall, pathogenic BLM mutations were detected in 0.609% (6/985) of prostate cancer cases. All mutations were loss-of-function truncating lesions (splicing or nonsense alterations). No Ashkenazi BLM mutations were observed. The population frequency of pathogenic or likely pathogenic BLM alterations detected in gnomAD was 0.025% (31/124,589). Compared to gnomAD controls, the relative risk of BLM mutations in prostate cancer patients was 24.3 (95% CI 10.2 to 58.2; P < 0.0001). One family had a pathogenic splice variant in BLM that cosegregated with disease in three of three cases with lethal/high risk prostate cancer. Tumor DNA sequencing was possible in 5 of 6 BLM carriers; no case demonstrated LOH or additional somatic BLM mutations. Interestingly, 2/5 cases on tumor sequencing also had bi-allelic BRCA2 inactivation. Conclusions: Germline BLM mutations may play a role in prostate cancer risk. Given the role of BLM in chromosomal stability and evidence of concurrent BRCA2 inactivation in a subset of cases, larger cohorts and functional analyses will be critical for better understanding the role of BLM in prostate cancer.

scholarly journals Polymorphisms in Genes Encoding Glutathione Transferase Pi and Glutathione Transferase Omega Influence Prostate Cancer Risk and Prognosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veljko Santric ◽  
Dejan Dragicevic ◽  
Marija Matic ◽  
Milica Djokic ◽  
Marija Pljesa-Ercegovac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Glutathione Transferase ◽  
Redox Homeostasis ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Gst Polymorphisms ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Genes Encoding ◽  
Gst Polymorphism ◽  
First Time

Considering the pleiotropic roles of glutathione transferase (GST) omega class members in redox homeostasis, we hypothesized that polymorphisms in GSTO1 and GSTO2 might contribute to prostate cancer (PC) development and progression. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive analysis of GSTO1 and GSTO2 SNPs’ role in susceptibility to PC, as well as whether they might serve as prognostic biomarkers independently or in conjunction with other common GST polymorphisms (GSTM1, GSTT1, and GSTP1). Genotyping was performed in 237 PC cases and 236 age-matched controls by multiplex PCR for deletion of GST polymorphisms and quantitative PCR for SNPs. The results of this study, for the first time, demonstrated that homozygous carriers of both GSTO1*A/A and GSTO2*G/G variant genotypes are at increased risk of PC. This was further confirmed by haplotype analysis, which showed that H2 comprising both GSTO1*A and GSTO2*G variant alleles represented a high-risk combination. However, the prognostic relevance of polymorphisms in GST omega genes was not found in our cohort of PC patients. Analysis of the role of other investigated GST polymorphisms (GSTM1, GSTT1, and GSTP1) in terms of PC prognosis has shown shorter survival in carriers of GSTP1*T/T (rs1138272) genotype than in those carrying at least one referent allele. In addition, the presence of GSTP1*T/T genotype independently predicted a four-fold higher risk of overall mortality among PC patients. This study demonstrated a significant prognostic role of GST polymorphism in PC.

scholarly journals Genetic predisposition to prostate cancer: an update

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly Ni Raghallaigh ◽  
Rosalind Eeles
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Genetic Variation ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Targeted Screening ◽  
European Populations

AbstractImprovements in DNA sequencing technology and discoveries made by large scale genome-wide association studies have led to enormous insight into the role of genetic variation in prostate cancer risk. High-risk prostate cancer risk predisposition genes exist in addition to common germline variants conferring low-moderate risk, which together account for over a third of familial prostate cancer risk. Identifying men with additional risk factors such as genetic variants or a positive family history is of clinical importance, as men with such risk factors have a higher incidence of prostate cancer with some evidence to suggest diagnosis at a younger age and poorer outcomes. The medical community remains in disagreement on the benefits of a population prostate cancer screening programme reliant on PSA testing. A reduction in mortality has been demonstrated in many studies, but at the cost of significant amounts of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Developing targeted screening strategies for high-risk men is currently the subject of investigation in a number of prospective studies. At present, approximately 38% of the familial risk of PrCa can be explained based on published SNPs, with men in the top 1% of the risk profile having a 5.71-fold increase in risk of developing cancer compared with controls. With approximately 170 prostate cancer susceptibility loci now identified in European populations, there is scope to explore the clinical utility of genetic testing and genetic-risk scores in prostate cancer screening and risk stratification, with such data in non-European populations eagerly awaited. This review will focus on both the rare and common germline genetic variation involved in hereditary and familial prostate cancer, and discuss ongoing research in exploring the role of targeted screening in this high-risk group of men.

scholarly journals Social Jetlag and Prostate Cancer Incidence in Alberta’s Tomorrow Project: A Prospective Cohort Study

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3873
Author(s):  
Liang Hu ◽  
Andrew Harper ◽  
Emily Heer ◽  
Jessica McNeil ◽  
Chao Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Prostate Cancer Incidence ◽  
Social Jetlag ◽  
Increased Risk

We investigated the association of social jetlag (misalignment between the internal clock and socially required timing of activities) and prostate cancer incidence in a prospective cohort in Alberta, Canada. Data were collected from 7455 cancer-free men aged 35–69 years enrolled in Alberta’s Tomorrow Project (ATP) from 2001–2007. In the 2008 survey, participants reported usual bed- and wake-times on weekdays and weekend days. Social jetlag was defined as the absolute difference in waking time between weekday and weekend days, and was categorized into three groups: 0–<1 h (from 0 to anything smaller than 1), 1–<2 h (from 1 to anything smaller than 2), and 2+ h. ATP facilitated data linkage with the Alberta Cancer Registry in June 2018 to determine incident prostate cancer cases (n = 250). Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regressions, adjusting for a range of covariates. Median follow-up was 9.57 years, yielding 68,499 person-years. Baseline presence of social jetlag of 1–<2 h (HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.10 to 2.01), and 2+ hours (HR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.15 to 2.46) were associated with increased prostate cancer risk vs. those reporting no social jetlag (p for trend = 0.004). These associations remained after adjusting for sleep duration (p for trend = 0.006). With respect to chronotype, the association between social jetlag and prostate cancer risk remained significant in men with early chronotypes (p for trend = 0.003) but attenuated to null in men with intermediate (p for trend = 0.150) or late chronotype (p for trend = 0.381). Our findings suggest that greater than one hour of habitual social jetlag is associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer. Longitudinal studies with repeated measures of social jetlag and large samples with sufficient advanced prostate cancer cases are needed to confirm these findings.

scholarly journals Associations Between Polymorphisms in Genes Related to Oxidative Stress and DNA Repair, Interactions With Serum Antioxidants, and Prostate Cancer Risk: Results From the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhihong Gong ◽  
Mary E. Platek ◽  
Cathee Till ◽  
Phyllis J. Goodman ◽  
Catherine M. Tangen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oxidative Stress ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Minor Allele ◽  
Cancer Etiology ◽  
Lower Serum ◽  
Prostate Cancer Prevention

Study of polymorphisms in genes related to the generation and removal of oxidative stress and repair of oxidative DNA damage will lead to new insights into the genetic basis of prostate cancer. In the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT), a double-blind, randomized controlled trial testing finasteride versus placebo for prostate cancer prevention, we intend to investigate the role of oxidative stress/DNA repair mechanisms in prostate cancer etiology and whether these polymorphisms modify prostate cancer risk by interacting with antioxidant status in both placebo and finasteride arms. We evaluated associations of selected candidate polymorphisms in genes in these pathways, and interactions with pre-diagnostic serum antioxidants, and the risk of prostate cancer among 1,598 cases and 1,706 frequency-matched controls enrolled in the PCPT. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models. While there were no statistically significant associations observed in the placebo arm, several SNPs were associated with prostate cancer in the finasteride arm. Specifically, APEX1-rs1760944 was associated with increased risk of total prostate cancer (per minor allele: p-trend=0.04). OGG1-rs1052133 was positively (CG/GG vs. CC: OR=1.32, 95% CI: 1.01-1.73) and NOS3-rs1799983 was inversely (per minor allele: p-trend=0.04) associated with risk of low-grade prostate cancer. LIG3-rs1052536 and XRCC1-rs25489 were suggestively associated with reduced risk of high-grade prostate cancer (per minor allele: both p-trend=0.04). In the placebo arm, significant associations were observed among men with higher serum lycopene for APEX1-rs1760944 and NQO1-rs1800566, or higher serum β-cryptoxanthin for ERCC4-rs1800067. In the finasteride arm, stronger associations were observed among men with lower serum lycopene for NOS3-rs1799983, higher serum α-carotene, β-carotene, and β-cryptoxanthin for LIG3-rs1052536, or lower serum retinol for SOD2-rs1799725. These results suggest that germline variations in oxidative stress and DNA repair pathways may contribute to prostate carcinogenesis and that these associations may differ by intraprostatic sex steroid hormone status and be further modified by antioxidant status. Findings provide insights into the complex role of gene, gene-antioxidant and -finasteride interactions in prostate cancer etiology, and thus may lead to the development of preventative strategies.

scholarly journals The modern role of androgen deprivation therapy in the management of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 24-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Gunner ◽  
Aziz Gulamhusein ◽  
Derek J Rosario
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Cardiovascular Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk

Introduction: Approximately 50% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer will be exposed to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) at some stage. The role of ADT in the management of metastatic disease has long been recognised, and its place in the management of localised and locally advanced disease has become clearer in the past few years. Nevertheless, concerns remain that some men might not benefit from ADT in earlier-stage disease. The purpose of the current article is to provide a brief narrative review of the role of ADT as part of a strategy of treatment with curative intent, concentrating mainly on key recent developments in the area. Methods: Narrative literature review of key publications in the English language relating to ADT in the management of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. Results: In locally advanced and high-risk localised prostate cancer, the use of ADT in combination with radiotherapy improves disease-specific and overall survival. There is no evidence to support the use of ADT in the treatment of low-risk localised prostate cancer. There appears to be an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality associated with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists, particularly in men with pre-existing cardiovascular disease, but the relevance of this in the adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting is currently unclear. Conclusions: Future studies should focus on identification of men who are at risk from cardiovascular complications associated with ADT and on the comparison of radiotherapy with ADT versus surgery in the management of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer, particularly with regards to men with pre-existing comorbidities.

scholarly journals O8A.4 Asbestos exposure and prostate cancer, really?

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A71.1-A71
Author(s):  
Marie-Elise Parent ◽  
M Hugues Richard
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Asbestos Exposure ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Prostate Cancer Risk ◽  
Cumulative Exposure ◽  
Population Exposure ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Chrysotile Asbestos ◽  
Increased Risk

BackgroundGeneral population exposure to asbestos from residential insulation and from environmental sources during childhood have recently been associated with prostate cancer. While asbestos fibers can be found in the prostate of workplace-exposed men at autopsy, few occupational studies have reported on asbestos exposure and prostate cancer incidence. We examined the association between lifetime occupational exposure to chrysotile asbestos and prostate cancer risk in a large population-based case-control study.MethodsCases were 1933 men with histologically-confirmed incident prostate cancer, aged ≤75 years, diagnosed in 2005–2009 in Montreal. Concurrently, 1994 population controls from the same residential area and age distribution were randomly selected from electoral lists. In-person interviews elicited detailed socio-demographics, lifestyle and work histories. Industrial hygienists used job-specific information to provide semi-quantitative evaluations of intensity and frequency of exposure to 345 chemical agents, including asbestos, and a measure of confidence in the evaluation. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for prostate cancer risk associated with exposure to chrysotile asbestos.ResultsAfter restriction to probable and definite exposure, and application of a 5 year lag, 12.5% of cases and 11.8% of controls were ever exposed to asbestos (OR=1.1, 95% CI 0.9–1.3). For duration of exposure, there was no increase in risk of overall prostate cancer in the lower tertiles of exposure but risk was elevated in the upper tertile (OR=1.6, 95% CI 1.2–2.2). Similarly, for cumulative exposure, risk was elevated in the upper tertile only (OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1–2.1). Analyses considering tumor grades also showed a higher risk in the upper tertile of cumulative exposure for non-aggressive (OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1–2.2) and especially aggressive (OR=1.9, 95% CI 1.2–3.0) cancers.ConclusionOur findings are consistent with an increased risk of prostate cancer with prolonged and high cumulative exposure to chrysotile asbestos, and particularly for the aggressive form of the disease.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document