Evaluation of a genomic-based prognostic test for metastasis in high-risk post-prostatectomy patients: Does it impact physician decision making?

Authors

null

Ketan K. Badani

Department of Urology, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, New York, NY

Ketan K. Badani , Darby J. S. Thompson , Anirban Pradip Mitra , Mercedeh Ghadessi , Christine Buerki , Elai Davicioni , Penelope J. Wood

Organizations

Department of Urology, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, New York, NY, EMMES Canada, Burnaby, BC, Canada, University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, GenomeDx Biosciences Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: Currently, identification of individual patients who are truly at risk of developing lethal prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP) is based on clinical nomograms. A prospectively validated genomic classifier (Decipher) has been shown to more accurately predict metastatic disease post RP than established clinical predictors and can identify patients with adverse pathology who may be cured by RP alone and may therefore not require additional treatment. Methods: An IRB-approved study assessed the impact of a genomic classifier (GC) test in 240 pathologically high-risk post RP case reviews. Twenty (20) urologic oncologists from 18 institutions reviewed 12 cases presented in a randomized, de-identified fashion via a secure online platform to provide treatment recommendations pre- and post- patient GC test results. Possible recommendations included referral to radiation oncologist and/or initiation of adjuvant hormones, close observation, or other. The primary endpoint was any change in treatment recommendation after unblinding of GC test results. Confidence in treatment recommendations was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: Following unblinding of GC test results, treatment recommendations changed in 43% (95% CI: 37-49) of all cases. Specifically, among cases with a pre-GC recommendation involving treatment, 31% (95% CI: 23-41) of respondents changed their recommendation to observation post-GC.Respondents considered the GC result to have influenced their recommendation in 63% (95% CI: 56-68) of cases. The addition of information provided by the GC result increased decision making confidence in 39% (95% CI: 30-49) of cases where a change of treatment recommendation was made. Following unblinding, physicians reported that the GC result was clinically relevant in 84% (95% CI: 79-84) of cases. Conclusions: GC appears to influence treatment recommendations and decision making confidence for high-risk prostatectomy patients. This study suggests that clinical implementation of GC may potentially impact treatment recommendations.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session B: Prostate, Penile, Urethral, and Testicular Cancer, and Urothelial Carcinoma

Track

Urothelial Carcinoma,Prostate Cancer,Penile, Urethral, and Testicular Cancer

Sub Track

Prostate Cancer

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 6; abstr 196)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2013.31.6_suppl.196

Abstract #

196

Poster Bd #

C2

Abstract Disclosures