No abstract

BackgroundWhilst multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) has been a significant advance in the diagnosis of prostate cancer, scanning all patients with elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels is considered too costly for widespread National Health Service (NHS) use, as the predictive value of PSA levels for significant disease is poor. Despite the fact that novel blood and urine tests are available which may predict aggressive disease better than PSA, they are not routinely employed due to a lack of clinical validity studies.Furthermore approximately 40 % of mp-MRI studies are reported as indeterminate, which can lead to repeat examinations or unnecessary biopsy with associated patient anxiety, discomfort, risk and additional costs.Methods/DesignWe aim to clinically validate a panel of minimally invasive promising blood and urine biomarkers, to better select patients that will benefit from a multiparametric prostate MRI. We will then test whether the performance of the mp-MRI can be improved by the addition of an advanced diffusion-weighted MRI technique, which uses a biophysical model to characterise tissue microstructure called VERDICT; Vascular and Extracellular Restricted Diffusion for Cytometry in Tumours.INNOVATE is a prospective single centre cohort study in 365 patients. mp-MRI will act as the reference standard for the biomarker panel. A clinical outcome based reference standard based on biopsy, mp-MRI and follow-up will be used for VERDICT MRI.DiscussionWe expect the combined effect of biomarkers and VERDICT MRI will improve care by better detecting aggressive prostate cancer early and make mp-MRI before biopsy economically viable for universal NHS adoption.Trial registrationINNOVATE is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, with reference NCT02689271.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2856-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose: We aimed to establish whether programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, in ovarian cancer tumor tissue and blood, could be used as biomarkers for discrimination of tumor histology and prognosis of ovarian cancer. Experimental Design: Immune cells were separated from blood, ascites, and tumor tissue obtained from women with suspected ovarian cancer and studied for the differential expression of possible immune biomarkers using flow cytometry. PD-L1 expression on tumor-associated inflammatory cells was assessed by immunohistochemistry and tissue microarray. Plasma soluble PD-L1 was measured using sandwich ELISA. The relationships among immune markers were explored using hierarchical cluster analyses. Results: Biomarkers from the discovery cohort that associated with PD-L1+ cells were found. PD-L1+ CD14+ cells and PD-L1+ CD11c+ cells in the monocyte gate showed a distinct expression pattern when comparing benign tumors and epithelial ovarian cancers (EOCs)—confirmed in the validation cohort. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed PD-L1+ and PD-L1+ CD14+ cells in the monocyte gate performed better than the well-established tumor marker CA-125 alone. Plasma soluble PD-L1 was elevated in patients with EOC compared with healthy women and patients with benign ovarian tumors. Low total PD-1+ expression on lymphocytes was associated with improved survival. Conclusions: Differential expression of immunological markers relating to the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in blood can be used as potential diagnostic and prognostic markers in EOC. These data have implications for the development and trial of anti–PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 23(13); 3453–60. ©2016 AACR.

We present findings of a cancer multidisciplinary-team (MDT) coordinated mainstreaming pathway of unselected 5-panel germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 and parallel somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in all women with epithelial-OC and highlight the discordance between germline and somatic testing strategies across two cancer centres. Patients were counselled and consented by a cancer MDT member. The uptake of parallel multi-gene germline and somatic testing was 97.7%. Counselling by clinical-nurse-specialist more frequently needed >1 consultation (53.6% (30/56)) compared to a medical (15.0% (21/137)) or surgical oncologist (15.3% (17/110)) (p < 0.001). The median age was 54 (IQR = 51–62) years in germline pathogenic-variant (PV) versus 61 (IQR = 51–71) in BRCA wild-type (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in distribution of PVs by ethnicity, stage, surgery timing or resection status. A total of 15.5% germline and 7.8% somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 PVs were identified. A total of 2.3% patients had RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs. A total of 11% germline PVs were large-genomic-rearrangements and missed by somatic testing. A total of 20% germline PVs are missed by somatic first BRCA-testing approach and 55.6% germline PVs missed by family history ascertainment. The somatic testing failure rate is higher (23%) for patients undergoing diagnostic biopsies. Our findings favour a prospective parallel somatic and germline panel testing approach as a clinically efficient strategy to maximise variant identification. UK Genomics test-directory criteria should be expanded to include a panel of OC genes.