MP20-04 DECIPHER PROSTATE CANCER CLASSIFIER DOES NOT CORRELATE WITH CLINICOPATHOLOGIC PROSTATE CANCER CLASSIFIERS IN AFRICAN AMERICAN MEN

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Staging I1 Apr 2017MP20-04 DECIPHER PROSTATE CANCER CLASSIFIER DOES NOT CORRELATE WITH CLINICOPATHOLOGIC PROSTATE CANCER CLASSIFIERS IN AFRICAN AMERICAN MEN Jordan Alger, Rohit Patil, Anna Chichura, Filipe La Fuente Carvalho, Jonathan Hwang, and Lambros Stamatakis Jordan AlgerJordan Alger More articles by this author , Rohit PatilRohit Patil More articles by this author , Anna ChichuraAnna Chichura More articles by this author , Filipe La Fuente CarvalhoFilipe La Fuente Carvalho More articles by this author , Jonathan HwangJonathan Hwang More articles by this author , and Lambros StamatakisLambros Stamatakis More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.636AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES In the post-USPSTF era, the decision to identify and treat prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. The Decipher Prostate Cancer Classifier (DPCC) is a genomic test that independently predicts the risk of metastasis and prostate cancer specific mortality (PCSM). The studies used to validate the outcomes of the DPCC were comprised of mostly Caucasian men. Given the increased risk of PCSM in African American (AA) men, we sought to identify the utility of DPCC in an exclusively AA cohort and compare the results to previously well-established risk classification systems. METHODS Using an IRB-approved single institution database, we identified 72 AA men who had undergone radical prostatectomy between December 2008 and April 2016 for whom the DPCC was retrospectively ordered. Clinicopathologic variables were then used to risk stratify the patients based on the D'Amico and CAPRA-S risk classification systems. Comparisons were made to the DPCC risk scores based on low, intermediate, and high risk using a Chi-square analysis. RESULTS In this AA cohort, there was no association between DPCC risk scores and CAPRA-S scores (p = 0.24). There was a relationship trend between DPCC risk scores and D'Amico risk categories, but this finding was not statistically significant (p = 0.08). Among those with a low CAPRA-S and D'Amico risk, DPCC re-classified 28.6% and 12.5% of these men into a high risk category, respectively. Conversely, among men with combined intermediate and high CAPRA-S and D'Amico risk, 43.1% and 39.3% were re-classified as low risk based on DPCC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In this exclusive AA cohort, DPCC risk groups do not correlate with the CAPRA-S or D'Amico risk classification systems, which calls into question the clinical validity of these tools when counseling AA men. Prospective studies are needed to determine the true correlation of DPCC risk and cancer outcomes in this high risk subpopulation to better inform management decisions. © 2017FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 197Issue 4SApril 2017Page: e240 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2017MetricsAuthor Information Jordan Alger More articles by this author Rohit Patil More articles by this author Anna Chichura More articles by this author Filipe La Fuente Carvalho More articles by this author Jonathan Hwang More articles by this author Lambros Stamatakis More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...