You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Markers II (PD42)1 May 2024PD42-04 GUT MICROBIOME SIGNATURE AS A PREDICTIVE AND MODIFIABLE BIOMARKER FOR PROSTATE CANCER Michael A. Liss, James White, Zhao Lai, Teresa Johnson-Pais, Robin Leach, Martin Goros, Jonathan Gelfond, and Brian Wickes Michael A. LissMichael A. Liss , James WhiteJames White , Zhao LaiZhao Lai , Teresa Johnson-PaisTeresa Johnson-Pais , Robin LeachRobin Leach , Martin GorosMartin Goros , Jonathan GelfondJonathan Gelfond , and Brian WickesBrian Wickes View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008560.54103.65.04AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The gut microbiome is increasingly recognized as a factor in non-gastrointestinal cancers, including prostate cancer. This study aimed to create a gut microbiome-based signature for prostate cancer (PCa) that doesn't rely on the prostate-specific antigen level. METHODS: The research involved analyzing fecal samples from men undergoing prostate biopsy preparations and participants in the San Antonio Biomarkers of Risk (SABOR) study. After DNA extraction, sequencing, and bioinformatics analysis, 39 unique microbial signals were identified and combined driven by an artificial intelligence model to generate a microbiome signature ranging from 0 to 1. Then were followed for over a 7 year period. RESULTS: Association to prostate cancer: (Prostate cancer): The signature is significantly associated prostate cancer (OR 9.47, 95% CI 3.68–25.6, p<0.001). Using a threshold of 0.25, The operational characteristics of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) at this threshold were 82.7%, 52.1%, 40.2%, and 88.5%, respectively. (Clinically significant PCa): We also examined the ability of the same microbiome signature to predict the clinically significant PCa (i.e., GG2+). The signature was able to produce a significant association with csPCa in multivariable analysis (OR 14.9, 95% CI 4.08-60.7, p<0.001). The ROC curve displays an AUC of 0.712 (95%CI 0.708–0.712). The threshold used to call a positive test was the same and led to a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 84.8%, 46.9%, 22.2% and 94.5%, respectively. Predictive: Prostate cancer free survival was reduced with a baseline high PCa microbiome score for any prostate cancer (HR 3.97, 95% CI 2.14-7.36, p<0.001) and csPCa (HR 11.1, 95% CI 1.42-87.17, p<0.001) after a median follow up of 4.5 years (IQR 3.87–4.98 Years). Modifiable: We calculated our publicly available microbial genomic data from a study using fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IBD has been linked with higher risk of prostate cancer. The donors had low PCa microbiome score and when given to IBD subjects with high scores were able to significantly lower the PCa microbiome score (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This signature is a novel modifiable biomarker for assessing prostate cancer risk and has the potential be a modifiable risk factor. Download PPT Source of Funding: Los Padres FoundationRoger L. and Laura D. Zeller Charitable Foundation Chair in Urologic Cancer © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e893 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Michael A. Liss More articles by this author James White More articles by this author Zhao Lai More articles by this author Teresa Johnson-Pais More articles by this author Robin Leach More articles by this author Martin Goros More articles by this author Jonathan Gelfond More articles by this author Brian Wickes More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liss et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: