UC San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA
Rahul Raj Aggarwal , Li Zhang , Tomasz M. Beer , Jack Youngren , Alise Stromlund , Alexander Bell , Adam Foye , Denise Playdle , Joshi J. Alumkal , Robert Evan Reiter , Martin Gleave , Christopher P. Evans , George V. Thomas , Jiaoti Huang , Lawrence D. True , Matthew Rettig , Primo Lara Jr., Kim N. Chi , Eric Jay Small
Background: Detection of t-SCNC in mCRPC patients relies primarily on histopathologic evaluation (Histo) of a metastatic tumor biopsy (bx), likely leading to underdiagnosis. The clinical features of t-SCNC and the diagnostic utility of serum NE markers (neuron-specific enolase (NSE) and chromogranin (CGA)) were evaluated. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) underwent a metastatic bx at one of 5 centers. Histo was performed by 3 independent pathologists (JH, GT, LT). NE markers were evaluated in a central lab (lower limit = 1 ng/mL). Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square test were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Receiver-operative-curve (ROC) analysis of serum NE markers was undertaken. Results: 160 consecutive pts with available Histo and NE markers were included. t-SCNC was found in 27 pts (17%). Detection of t-SCNC was observed in all bx sites, including liver (14%), lymph node (19%) and bone (14%). Clinical features are shown in the Table. By ROC analysis, if both serum NSE was > 6.05 ng/mL and chromogranin was > 3.1 ng/mL, the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) for the detection of t-SCNC were 95%, 50%, 98%, and 22%, respectively. Conclusions: Many of the classic features of de novo SCNC, including low PSA levels, do not reliably distinguish t-SCNC. In contrast, serum NE markers have diagnostic utility with high sensitivity and NPV, but low specificity and PPV. Heterogeneous NE differentiation may partially account for these findings. Clinical trial information: NCT02432001
Small Cell (N = 27) | Not Small Cell (N = 133) | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|
Gleason score | |||
< 8 | 12 (44%) | 59 (44%) | 0.992 |
>= 8 | 13 (48%) | 65 (49%) | |
Unknown | 2 (7%) | 9 (7%) | |
Sites of Disease | |||
Liver | 8 (30%) | 22 (17%) | 0.257 |
Other Visceral | 4 (15%) | 29 (22%) | |
Bone/node only | 15 (56%) | 82 (62%) | |
Median Lab Values (range) | |||
PSA | 64.8 (0.4, 1500) | 46.2 (0.4, 1657) | 0.938 |
Alk phos | 146 (55, 1506) | 94 (36, 996) | 0.212 |
LDH | 235 (150, 1284) | 199 (31, 2643) | 0.039 |
Hemoglobin | 12.5 (8.9, 14.4) | 12.6 (7.8, 16.1) | 0.439 |
NSE | 11.6 (5, 90) | 7.1 (1, 83) | < 0.001 |
CGA | 7.8 (1, 70) | 6.0 (1, 198) | 0.977 |
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 Disclosures
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Nataliya Mar
2021 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Morgan Goujon
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Meryam Losee
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Sara Bleve