Prostate cancer is the most prevalent non-skin cancer in men and is the leading cause of cancer-related death. Early detection of prostate cancer is largely determined by a widely used prostate specific antigen (PSA) blood test and biopsy is performed for definitive diagnosis. Prostate cancer is asymptomatic in the early stage of the disease, comprises of diverse clinico-pathologic and progression features, and is characterized by a large subset of the indolent cancer type. Therefore, it is critical to develop an individualized approach for early detection, disease stratification (indolent vs. aggressive), and prediction of treatment response for prostate cancer. There has been remarkable progress in prostate cancer biomarker discovery, largely through advancements in genomic technologies. A rich array of prostate cancer diagnostic and prognostic tests has emerged for serum (4K, phi), urine (Progensa, T2-ERG, ExoDx, SelectMDx), and tumor tissue (ConfirmMDx, Prolaris, Oncoytype DX, Decipher). The development of these assays has created new opportunities for improving prostate cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment decisions. While opening exciting opportunities, these developments also pose unique challenges in terms of selecting and incorporating these assays into the continuum of prostate cancer patient care.

In the United States, prostate cancer (CaP) remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men. CaP is predominantly indolent at diagnosis, with a small fraction (25–30%) representing an aggressive subtype (Gleason score 7–10) that is prone to metastatic progression. This fact, coupled with the criticism surrounding the role of prostate specific antigen in prostate cancer screening, demonstrates the current need for a biomarker(s) that can identify clinically significant CaP and avoid unnecessary biopsy procedures and psychological implications of being diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Although several diagnostic biomarkers are available to clinicians, very few comparative trials have been performed to assess the clinical effectiveness of these biomarkers. It is of note, however, that a majority of these clinical trials have been over-represented by men of Caucasian origin, despite the fact that African American men have a 1.7 times higher incidence and 2.1 times higher rate of mortality from prostate cancer. Biomarkers for CaP diagnosis based on the tissue of origin include urine-based gene expression assays (PCA3, Select MDx, ExoDx Prostate IntelliScore, Mi-Prostate Score, PCA3-PCGEM1 gene panel), blood-based protein biomarkers (4K, PHI), and tissue-based DNA biomarker (Confirm MDx). Another potential direction that has emerged to aid in the CaP diagnosis include multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI), which in conjunction with clinically validated biomarkers may provide a better approach to predict clinically significant CaP at diagnosis. In this review, we discuss some of the adjunctive biomarker tests along with newer imaging modalities that are currently available to help clinicians decide which patients are at risk of having high-grade CaP on prostate biopsy with the emphasis on clinical utility of the tests across African American (AA) and Caucasian (CA) men.

This mini review summarizes the currently available clinical biofluid assays for PCa. The second most prevalent cancer worldwide is PCa. PCa is a heterogeneous disease, with a large percentage of prostate tumors being indolent, and with a relatively slow metastatic potential. However, due to the high case numbers, the absolute number of PCa-related deaths is still high. In fact, it causes the second highest number of cancer deaths in American men. As a first step for the diagnosis of PCa, the PSA test has been widely used. However, it has low specificity, which results in a high number of false positives leading to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Newer derivatives of the original PSA test, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved 4K (four kallikreins) and the PHI (Prostate Health Index) blood tests, have higher specificities. Tissue-based PCa tests are problematic as biopsies are invasive and have limited accuracy due to prostate tumor heterogeneity. Liquid biopsies offer a minimally or non-invasive choice for the patients, while providing a more representative reflection of the spatial heterogeneity in the prostate. In addition to the abovementioned blood-based tests, urine is a promising source of PCa biomarkers, offering a supplementary avenue for early detection and improved tumor classification. Four urine-based PCa tests are either FDA- or CLIA-approved: PCA3 (PROGENSA), ExoDX Prostate Intelliscore, MiPS, and SelectMDx. We will discuss these urine-based, as well as the blood-based, clinical PCa tests in more detail. We also briefly discuss a few promising biofluid marker candidates (DNA methylation, micro-RNAs) which are not in clinical application. As no single assay is perfect, we envision that a combination of biomarkers, together with imaging, will become the preferred practice.

Https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.27534 Indu Kohaar, Qiyuan Li, Yongmei Chen, Lakshmi Ravindranath, Denise Young, Amina Ali, Isabell A. Sesterhenn, Inger L. Rosner, Jennifer Cullen, Shiv...

In prostate cancer, emerging data highlight the role of DNA damage repair genes (DDRGs) in aggressive forms of the disease. However, DDRG mutations in African American men are not yet fully defined. Here, we profile germline mutations in all known DDRGs (N = 276) using whole genome sequences from blood DNA of a matched cohort of patients with primary prostate cancer comprising of 300 African American and 300 European Ancestry prostate cancer patients, to determine whether the mutation status can enhance patient stratification for specific targeted therapies. Here, we show that only 13 of the 46 DDRGs identified with pathogenic/likely pathogenic mutations are present in both African American and European ancestry patients. Importantly,RADfamily genes (RAD51, RAD54L, RAD54B), which are potentially targetable, as well asPMS2andBRCA1, are among the most frequently mutated DDRGs in African American, but not in European Ancestry patients.

Growing evidence indicates the involvement of a genetic component in prostate cancer (CaP) susceptibility and clinical severity. Studies have reported the role of germline mutations and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of TP53 as possible risk factors for cancer development. In this single institutional retrospective study, we identified common SNPs in the TP53 gene in AA and CA men and performed association analyses for functional TP53 SNPs with the clinico-pathological features of CaP. The SNP genotyping analysis of the final cohort of 308 men (212 AA; 95 CA) identified 74 SNPs in the TP53 region, with a minor allele frequency (MAF) of at least 1%. Two SNPs were non-synonymous in the exonic region of TP53: rs1800371 (Pro47Ser) and rs1042522 (Arg72Pro). The Pro47Ser variant had an MAF of 0.01 in AA but was not detected in CA. Arg72Pro was the most common SNP, with an MAF of 0.50 (0.41 in AA; 0.68 in CA). Arg72Pro was associated with a shorter time to biochemical recurrence (BCR) (p = 0.046; HR = 1.52). The study demonstrated ancestral differences in the allele frequencies of the TP53 Arg72Pro and Pro47Ser SNPs, providing a valuable framework for evaluating CaP disparities among AA and CA men.