Search

BackgroundThe prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic pathway is undergoing a radical change with the introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), genomic testing, and different prostate biopsy techniques. It has been proposed that these tests should be used in a sequential manner to optimise risk stratification.ObjectiveTo characterise the genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic features of mpMRI-visible and -nonvisible PCa in clinically localised disease.Design, setting, and participantsMulticore analysis of fresh prostate tissue sampled immediately after radical prostatectomy was performed for intermediate- to high-risk PCa.InterventionLow-pass whole-genome, exome, methylation, and transcriptome profiling of patient tissue cores taken from microscopically benign and cancerous areas in the same prostate. Circulating free and germline DNA was assessed from the blood of five patients.Outcome measurement and statistical analysisCorrelations between preoperative mpMRI and genomic characteristics of tumour and benign prostate samples were assessed. Gene profiles for individual tumour cores were correlated with existing genomic classifiers currently used for prognostication.Results and limitationsA total of 43 prostate cores (22 tumour and 21 benign) were profiled from six whole prostate glands. Of the 22 tumour cores, 16 were tumours visible and six were tumours nonvisible on mpMRI. Intratumour genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic heterogeneity was found within mpMRI-visible lesions. This could potentially lead to misclassification of patients using signatures based on copy number or RNA expression. Moreover, three of the six cores obtained from mpMRI-nonvisible tumours harboured one or more genetic alterations commonly observed in metastatic castration-resistant PCa. No circulating free DNA alterations were found. Limitations include the small cohort size and lack of follow-up.ConclusionsOur study supports the continued use of systematic prostate sampling in addition to mpMRI, as avoidance of systematic biopsies in patients with negative mpMRI may mean that clinically significant tumours harbouring genetic alterations commonly seen in metastatic PCa are missed. Furthermore, there is inconsistency in individual genomics when genomic classifiers are applied.Patient summaryOur study shows that tumour heterogeneity within prostate tumours visible on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can lead to misclassification of patients if only one core is used for genomic analysis. In addition, some cancers that were missed by mpMRI had genomic aberrations that are commonly seen in advanced metastatic prostate cancer. Avoiding biopsies in mpMRI-negative cases may mean that such potentially lethal cancers are missed.

Molecular information obtained from cancer patients' blood is an emerging and powerful research tool with immense potential as a companion diagnostic for patient stratification and monitoring. Blood, which can be sampled routinely, provides a means of inferring the current genetic status of patients' tumours via analysis of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) or circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA). However, accurate assessment of both CTCs and ctDNA requires all blood cells to be maintained intact until samples are processed. This dictates for ctDNA analysis EDTA blood samples must be processed with 4 h of draw, severely limiting the use of ctDNA in multi‐site trials. Here we describe a blood collection protocol that is amenable for analysis of both CTCs and ctDNA up to four days after blood collection. We demonstrate that yields of circulating free DNA (cfDNA) obtained from whole blood CellSave samples are equivalent to those obtained from conventional EDTA plasma processed within 4 h of blood draw. Targeted and genome‐wide NGS revealed comparable DNA quality and resultant sequence information from cfDNA within CellSave and EDTA samples. We also demonstrate that CTCs and ctDNA can be isolated from the same patient blood sample, and give the same patterns of CNA enabling direct analysis of the genetic status of patients' tumours. In summary, our results demonstrate the utility of a simple approach that enabling robust molecular analysis of CTCs and cfDNA for genotype‐directed therapies in multi‐site clinical trials and represent a significant methodological improvement for clinical benefit., Highlights Demonstrated collection of blood in CellSave tubes preserves cfDNA up to 96 h post draw.No significant difference between standard EDTA cfDNA and preserved cfDNA.Preserved cfDNA applicable to both targeted and genome wide NGS analysis.CTCs and cfDNA can be isolated from same CellSave blood sample.Comparable copy number aberrations seen in both CTCs and ctDNA from same blood sample.