Todd M. Morgan, Stephanie Daignault-Newton, Daniel E. Spratt, Rod L. Dunn, Udit Singhal, Linda A. Okoth, Felix Y. Feng, Anna M. Johnson, Brian R. Lane, Susan Linsell, Khurshid R. Ghani, James E. Montie, Rohit Mehra, Brent K. Hollenbeck, Thomas Maatman, Kirk Wojno, Frank N. Burks, Daniel Bekong, Jon Curry, Paul Rodriguez, Michael L. Cher
{"title":"基因表达分类器测试对前列腺根治术后辅助治疗的影响:G-MINOR 前瞻性随机分组交叉试验","authors":"Todd M. Morgan, Stephanie Daignault-Newton, Daniel E. Spratt, Rod L. Dunn, Udit Singhal, Linda A. Okoth, Felix Y. Feng, Anna M. Johnson, Brian R. Lane, Susan Linsell, Khurshid R. Ghani, James E. Montie, Rohit Mehra, Brent K. Hollenbeck, Thomas Maatman, Kirk Wojno, Frank N. Burks, Daniel Bekong, Jon Curry, Paul Rodriguez, Michael L. Cher","doi":"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.09.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background and objective</h3>Decipher is a tissue-based genomic classifier (GC) developed and validated in the post–radical prostatectomy (RP) setting as a predictor of metastasis. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled cluster-crossover trial assessing the use of Decipher to determine its impact on adjuvant treatment after RP.<h3>Methods</h3>Eligible patients had undergone RP within 9 mo of enrollment, had pT3–4 disease and/or positive surgical margins, and prostate-specific antigen <0.1 ng/ml. Centers were randomized to a sequence of 3-mo periods of either GC-informed care or usual care (UC). Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical (CAPRA-S) recurrence risk scores were provided to treating physicians and patients in all periods.<h3>Key findings and limitations</h3>Impact of GC test results on adjuvant treatment were compared with UC alone. Longitudinal patient-reported urinary and sexual function was assessed. A total of 175 patients were enrolled in 27 periods with GC and 163 in 28 periods with UC. At 18 mo after RP, an average patient in the GC arm received adjuvant treatment 9.7% of the time compared with 8.7% for an average individual in the UC arm (0.99% mean difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] –7.6%, 9.6%, <em>p</em> = 0.8). While controlling for CAPRA-S score, higher GC scores tended to result in an increased likelihood of adjuvant treatment that was not statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 1.35 per 0.1 increase in GC score, 95% CI 0.98–1.85, <em>p</em> = 0.066). Using the GC risk groups, reflecting clinical use, a high GC risk was associated with significantly higher odds of receiving adjuvant treatment (OR = 6.9, 95% CI 1.8, 26, <em>p</em> = 0.005) compared with a low GC score, adjusted for CAPRA-S score. There were no differences in patient-reported urinary and sexual function between the study arms. As oncologic outcomes are immature, the present data cannot address whether GC testing provides any cancer control benefit.<h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3>GC testing impacts adjuvant therapy administration when viewed through the risk categories presented in the patient report; however, these data do not provide specific support for GC testing in the adjuvant treatment setting.","PeriodicalId":12223,"journal":{"name":"European urology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Gene Expression Classifier Testing on Adjuvant Treatment Following Radical Prostatectomy: The G-MINOR Prospective Randomized Cluster-crossover Trial\",\"authors\":\"Todd M. Morgan, Stephanie Daignault-Newton, Daniel E. Spratt, Rod L. Dunn, Udit Singhal, Linda A. Okoth, Felix Y. Feng, Anna M. Johnson, Brian R. Lane, Susan Linsell, Khurshid R. Ghani, James E. Montie, Rohit Mehra, Brent K. Hollenbeck, Thomas Maatman, Kirk Wojno, Frank N. Burks, Daniel Bekong, Jon Curry, Paul Rodriguez, Michael L. Cher\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.09.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Background and objective</h3>Decipher is a tissue-based genomic classifier (GC) developed and validated in the post–radical prostatectomy (RP) setting as a predictor of metastasis. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled cluster-crossover trial assessing the use of Decipher to determine its impact on adjuvant treatment after RP.<h3>Methods</h3>Eligible patients had undergone RP within 9 mo of enrollment, had pT3–4 disease and/or positive surgical margins, and prostate-specific antigen <0.1 ng/ml. Centers were randomized to a sequence of 3-mo periods of either GC-informed care or usual care (UC). Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical (CAPRA-S) recurrence risk scores were provided to treating physicians and patients in all periods.<h3>Key findings and limitations</h3>Impact of GC test results on adjuvant treatment were compared with UC alone. Longitudinal patient-reported urinary and sexual function was assessed. A total of 175 patients were enrolled in 27 periods with GC and 163 in 28 periods with UC. At 18 mo after RP, an average patient in the GC arm received adjuvant treatment 9.7% of the time compared with 8.7% for an average individual in the UC arm (0.99% mean difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] –7.6%, 9.6%, <em>p</em> = 0.8). While controlling for CAPRA-S score, higher GC scores tended to result in an increased likelihood of adjuvant treatment that was not statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 1.35 per 0.1 increase in GC score, 95% CI 0.98–1.85, <em>p</em> = 0.066). Using the GC risk groups, reflecting clinical use, a high GC risk was associated with significantly higher odds of receiving adjuvant treatment (OR = 6.9, 95% CI 1.8, 26, <em>p</em> = 0.005) compared with a low GC score, adjusted for CAPRA-S score. There were no differences in patient-reported urinary and sexual function between the study arms. As oncologic outcomes are immature, the present data cannot address whether GC testing provides any cancer control benefit.<h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3>GC testing impacts adjuvant therapy administration when viewed through the risk categories presented in the patient report; however, these data do not provide specific support for GC testing in the adjuvant treatment setting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":25.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.09.011\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.09.011","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of Gene Expression Classifier Testing on Adjuvant Treatment Following Radical Prostatectomy: The G-MINOR Prospective Randomized Cluster-crossover Trial
Background and objective
Decipher is a tissue-based genomic classifier (GC) developed and validated in the post–radical prostatectomy (RP) setting as a predictor of metastasis. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled cluster-crossover trial assessing the use of Decipher to determine its impact on adjuvant treatment after RP.
Methods
Eligible patients had undergone RP within 9 mo of enrollment, had pT3–4 disease and/or positive surgical margins, and prostate-specific antigen <0.1 ng/ml. Centers were randomized to a sequence of 3-mo periods of either GC-informed care or usual care (UC). Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Postsurgical (CAPRA-S) recurrence risk scores were provided to treating physicians and patients in all periods.
Key findings and limitations
Impact of GC test results on adjuvant treatment were compared with UC alone. Longitudinal patient-reported urinary and sexual function was assessed. A total of 175 patients were enrolled in 27 periods with GC and 163 in 28 periods with UC. At 18 mo after RP, an average patient in the GC arm received adjuvant treatment 9.7% of the time compared with 8.7% for an average individual in the UC arm (0.99% mean difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] –7.6%, 9.6%, p = 0.8). While controlling for CAPRA-S score, higher GC scores tended to result in an increased likelihood of adjuvant treatment that was not statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 1.35 per 0.1 increase in GC score, 95% CI 0.98–1.85, p = 0.066). Using the GC risk groups, reflecting clinical use, a high GC risk was associated with significantly higher odds of receiving adjuvant treatment (OR = 6.9, 95% CI 1.8, 26, p = 0.005) compared with a low GC score, adjusted for CAPRA-S score. There were no differences in patient-reported urinary and sexual function between the study arms. As oncologic outcomes are immature, the present data cannot address whether GC testing provides any cancer control benefit.
Conclusions and clinical implications
GC testing impacts adjuvant therapy administration when viewed through the risk categories presented in the patient report; however, these data do not provide specific support for GC testing in the adjuvant treatment setting.
期刊介绍:
European Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles and reviews on a broad spectrum of urological issues. Covering topics such as oncology, impotence, infertility, pediatrics, lithiasis and endourology, the journal also highlights recent advances in techniques, instrumentation, surgery, and pediatric urology. This comprehensive approach provides readers with an in-depth guide to international developments in urology.