Clinical intervals and diagnostic characteristics in a cohort of prostate cancer patients in Spain: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND Little is known about the healthcare process for patients with prostate cancer, mainly because hospital-based data are not routinely published. The main objective of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of prostate cancer patients, the, diagnostic process and the factors that might influence intervals from consultation to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment. METHODS We conducted a multicentre, cohort study in seven hospitals in Spain. Patients' characteristics and diagnostic and therapeutic variables were obtained from hospital records and patients' structured interviews from October 2010 to September 2011. We used a multilevel logistic regression model to examine the association between patient care intervals and various variables influencing these intervals (age, BMI, educational level, ECOG, first specialist consultation, tumour stage, PSA, Gleason score, and presence of symptoms) and calculated the odds ratio (OR) and the interquartile range (IQR). To estimate the random inter-hospital variability, we used the median odds ratio (MOR). RESULTS 470 patients with prostate cancer were included. Mean age was 67.8 (SD: 7.6) years and 75.4 % were physically active. Tumour size was classified as T1 in 41.0 % and as T2 in 40 % of patients, their median Gleason score was 6.0 (IQR:1.0), and 36.1 % had low risk cancer according to the D'Amico classification. The median interval between first consultation and diagnosis was 89 days (IQR:123.5) with no statistically significant variability between centres. Presence of symptoms was associated with a significantly longer interval between first consultation and diagnosis than no symptoms (OR:1.93, 95%CI 1.29-2.89). The median time between diagnosis and first treatment (therapeutic interval) was 75.0 days (IQR:78.0) and significant variability between centres was found (MOR:2.16, 95%CI 1.45-4.87). This interval was shorter in patients with a high PSA value (p = 0.012) and a high Gleason score (p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS Most incident prostate cancer patients in Spain are diagnosed at an early stage of an adenocarcinoma. The period to complete the diagnostic process is approximately three months whereas the therapeutic intervals vary among centres and are shorter for patients with a worse prognosis. The presence of prostatic symptoms, PSA level, and Gleason score influence all the clinical intervals differently.

Prognostic role of genetic biomarkers in clinical progression of prostate cancer.

The aim of this study was to analyze the use of 12 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in genes ELAC2, RNASEL and MSR1 as biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa) detection and progression, as well as perform a genetic classification of high-risk patients. A cohort of 451 men (235 patients and 216 controls) was studied. We calculated means of regression analysis using clinical values (stage, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score and progression) in patients and controls at the basal stage and after a follow-up of 72 months. Significantly different allele frequencies between patients and controls were observed for rs1904577 and rs918 (MSR1 gene) and for rs17552022 and rs5030739 (ELAC2). We found evidence of increased risk for PCa in rs486907 and rs2127565 in variants AA and CC, respectively. In addition, rs627928 (TT-GT), rs486907 (AG) and rs3747531 (CG-CC) were associated with low tumor aggressiveness. Some had a weak linkage, such as rs1904577 and rs2127565, rs4792311 and rs17552022, and rs1904577 and rs918. Our study provides the proof-of-principle that some of the genetic variants (such as rs486907, rs627928 and rs2127565) in genes RNASEL, MSR1 and ELAC2 can be used as predictors of aggressiveness and progression of PCa. In the future, clinical use of these biomarkers, in combination with current ones, could potentially reduce the rate of unnecessary biopsies and specific treatments.