MP1-12 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN AMERICAN MEN USING A PROSTATE CANCER GENOMIC CLASSIFIER

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Markers I1 Apr 2015MP1-12 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN AMERICAN MEN USING A PROSTATE CANCER GENOMIC CLASSIFIER Michael Johnson, Voleak Choeurng, Kasra Yousefi, Elai Davicioni, Eric Klein, Robert Den, Adam Dicker, Ashley Ross, and Edward Schaeffer Michael JohnsonMichael Johnson More articles by this author , Voleak ChoeurngVoleak Choeurng More articles by this author , Kasra YousefiKasra Yousefi More articles by this author , Elai DavicioniElai Davicioni More articles by this author , Eric KleinEric Klein More articles by this author , Robert DenRobert Den More articles by this author , Adam DickerAdam Dicker More articles by this author , Ashley RossAshley Ross More articles by this author , and Edward SchaefferEdward Schaeffer More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.175AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Prostate cancer (PCa) is a common malignancy with reported differences in clinical outcomes and tumor biology between African-American (AA) and European-American (EA) males. The Decipher genomic classifier (DGC) is a microarray-based tool to predict metastatic disease in high-risk patients following prostatectomy. In this study, we sought to determine the utility of DGC in identifying ancestry-based differences. We further compared these results to microarray-derived approximations of alternative genomic classifiers (1) Genomic Prostate Score (md-GPS) a biopsy-based predictor of adverse pathology (2) Cell Cycle Progression (md-CCP) a biopsy-based predictor of PCa-death and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. METHODS A total of 561 men (121 AA, 441 EA) were selected from four academic institutions. These patients underwent radical prostatectomy as primary treatment for prostate cancer between 1987 and 2012 and had not received neoadjuvant chemo- or radiation-therapy. Patients were divided based on reported ancestry and matched according to CAPRA-S risk category. Within each risk category, DGC was applied to each sample and compared to md-GPD and md-CCP. Mixed effects logistic regression was applied to identify differences between the ancestry-based cohorts. RESULTS DGC was able to detect a statistically significant genomic signature between AA and EA patients within the low and high-risk CAPRA-S cohorts (p = 0.01, 0.04, respectively). DGC did not identify a statistically significant difference within the intermediate risk cohort (p=0.94). md-GPS genomic signature only identified a difference within the high-risk cohort (low: p=0.77, intermediate: p=0.07, high: p=0.04). md-CCP failed to identify statistically different signatures in all cohorts (low: p=0.92, intermediate: p=0.18, high: p=0.97). CONCLUSIONS Genome-scale analyses of prostate cancer between males of AA and EA ancestries shows different genomic signatures, suggesting differing tumor biology. Further clinical and basic science studies should be performed to elucidate the functional and prognostic implications of these differences. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e5 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Michael Johnson More articles by this author Voleak Choeurng More articles by this author Kasra Yousefi More articles by this author Elai Davicioni More articles by this author Eric Klein More articles by this author Robert Den More articles by this author Adam Dicker More articles by this author Ashley Ross More articles by this author Edward Schaeffer More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...