Genomics in Urologic Health and Disease| Volume 125, P64-72, March 2019

Prostate Cancer Genomic Classifier Relates More Strongly to Gleason Grade Group Than Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Score in Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsies

Published:December 12, 2018DOI:



      To assess the association between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) score, the Decipher score, and histologic grade of carcinoma in biopsy tissue among low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.


      MRI-ultrasound targeted biopsy of regions of interest and concurrent 12-core systematic biopsy was performed on men with Gleason grade group (GG) 1 and 2. We compared Decipher score with PI-RADS scores and biopsy Gleason GG. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP), and men with Decipher testing from a targeted biopsy core.


      One hundred two patients with GG1 and GG2 had biopsy Decipher testing. There was no significant difference in the median Decipher scores among the 3 multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging categories. Patients with GG2 vs GG1 in the setting of PI-RADS 4-5 had higher genomic scores (P = .01), but no significant difference was noted in patients with PI-RADS ≤3. The rate of genomic higher-risk disease on a targeted biopsy from PI-RADS5 was higher in GG2 (75%) vs GG1 (11.1%; P = .01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the Decipher score ≥0.45, (odds ratio (OR) 2.71; P = .02), and age (OR 1.11; P = .004) remained significant factors associated with Gleason GG2 on biopsy.


      High-risk genomic classification can be seen across all combinations of PI-RADS categories and Gleason GG1 and GG2, confirming a potential utility for Decipher testing in men with low- to favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The Decipher biopsy genomic test related to Gleason GG independent of PI-RADSv2 score. Confirmatory genomic testing for patients undergoing active surveillance appears more valuable than PI-RADSv2 score.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Urology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Klein EA
        • Cooperberg MR
        • Magi-Galluzzi C
        • et al.
        A 17-gene assay to predict prostate cancer aggressiveness in the context of Gleason grade heterogeneity, tumor multifocality, and biopsy undersampling.
        Eur Urol. 2014; 66: 550-560
        • Syed JS
        • Javier-Desloges J
        • Tatzel S
        • et al.
        Current management strategy for active surveillance in prostate cancer.
        Curr Oncol Rep. 2017; 19: 11
        • Ross AE
        • D'Amico AV
        • Freedland SJ
        Which, when and why? Rational use of tissue-based molecular testing in localized prostate cancer.
        Prostate Cancer Prostatic dis. 2016; 19: 1-6
        • Marrone M
        • Potosky AL
        • Penson D
        • Freedman AN
        A 22 gene-expression assay, decipher (R) (genomeDx biosciences) to predict five-year risk of metastatic prostate cancer in men treated with radical prostatectomy.
        PLoS Curr. 2015; 7 (pii: ecurrents.eogt.761b81608129ed61b0b48d42c04f92a4)
        • Karnes RJ
        • Bergstralh EJ
        • Davicioni E
        • et al.
        Validation of a genomic classifier that predicts metastasis following radical prostatectomy in an at risk patient population.
        J Urol. 2013; 190: 2047-2053
        • Cooperberg MR
        • Davicioni E
        • Crisan A
        • Jenkins RB
        • Ghadessi M
        • Karnes RJ
        Combined value of validated clinical and genomic risk stratification tools for predicting prostate cancer mortality in a high-risk prostatectomy cohort.
        Eur Urol. 2015; 67: 326-333
        • Spratt DE
        • Yousefi K
        • Deheshi S
        • et al.
        Individual patient-level meta-analysis of the performance of the decipher genomic classifier in high-risk men after prostatectomy to predict development of metastatic disease.
        J Clin Oncol. 2017; 35: 1991-1998
        • Spratt DE
        • Dai DLY
        • Den RB
        • et al.
        Performance of a prostate cancer genomic classifier in predicting metastasis in men with prostate-specific antigen persistence postprostatectomy.
        Eur Urol. 2018; 74: 107-114
        • Knudsen BS
        • Kim HL
        • Erho N
        • et al.
        Application of a clinical whole-transcriptome assay for staging and prognosis of prostate cancer diagnosed in needle core biopsy specimens.
        J Mol Diagn. 2016; 18: 395-406
        • Klein EA
        • Haddad Z
        • Yousefi K
        • et al.
        Decipher genomic classifier measured on prostate biopsy predicts metastasis risk.
        Urology. 2016; 90: 148-152
        • Nguyen PL
        • Haddad Z
        • Ross AE
        • et al.
        Ability of a genomic classifier to predict metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality after radiation or surgery based on needle biopsy specimens.
        Eur Urol. 2017; 72: 845-852
        • Carroll PH
        • Mohler JL
        NCCN guidelines updates: prostate cancer and prostate cancer early detection.
        J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2018; 16: 620-623
        • Spratt DE
        • Zhang J
        • Santiago-Jimenez M
        • et al.
        Development and validation of a novel integrated clinical-genomic risk group classification for localized prostate cancer.
        J Clinical Oncol. 2018; 36: 581-590
        • Radtke JP
        • Takhar M
        • Bonekamp D
        • et al.
        Transcriptome wide analysis of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and matching surgical specimens from high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy: the target must be hit.
        Eur Urol Focus. 2018; 4: 540-546
        • Lu AJ
        • Syed JS
        • Nguyen KA
        • et al.
        Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate predicts absence of clinically significant prostate cancer on 12-core template prostate biopsy.
        Urology. 2017; 105: 118-122
        • Weinreb JC
        • Barentsz JO
        • Choyke PL
        • et al.
        PI-RADS prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, version 2.
        Eur Urol. 2016; 69: 16-40
        • Epstein JI
        • Egevad L
        • Amin MB
        • et al.
        The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system.
        Am J Surg Pathol. 2016; 40: 244-252
        • Salmasi A
        • Said J
        • Shindel AW
        • et al.
        A 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score assay provides independent information on adverse pathology in the setting of combined mpMRI fusion-targeted and systematic prostate biopsy.
        J Urol. 2018; 200: 564-572
        • Leapman MS
        • Westphalen AC
        • Ameli N
        • et al.
        Association between a 17-gene genomic prostate score and multi-parametric prostate MRI in men with low and intermediate risk prostate cancer (PCa).
        PLoS One. 2017; 12e0185535
        • Klotz L
        • Loblaw A
        • Sugar L
        • et al.
        Active surveillance magnetic resonance imaging study (ASIST): results of a randomized multicenter prospective trial.
        Eur Urol. 2018; (pii: S0302-2838(18)30450-0)
        • Klein EA
        • Santiago-Jimenez M
        • Yousefi K
        • et al.
        Molecular analysis of low grade prostate cancer using a genomic classifier of metastatic potential.
        J Urol. 2017; 197: 122-128
        • Cooperberg MR
        • Cowan JE
        • Hilton JF
        • et al.
        Outcomes of active surveillance for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
        J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 228-234