Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
Last year, nearly 175,000 American men were diagnosed with prostate cancer . Most got the bad news after a blood test or physical exam raised concerns that warranted a biopsy of the prostate, a walnut-sized gland just below the bladder.
Traditional biopsies sample tissue from 12 systematically placed points within the prostate that are blind to tumor locations. Such procedures have helped to save many lives, but are prone to missing or misclassifying prostate cancers, which has led doctors both to over and under treat their patients.
Now, there may be a better approach. In a study of more than 2,000 men, NIH researchers and their colleagues recently found that combining the 12-point biopsy with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy during the same session more accurately diagnoses prostate cancer than either technique alone .
The findings address a long-standing challenge in prostate cancer diagnostics: performing a thorough prostate biopsy to allow a pathologist to characterize as accurately as possible the behavior of a tumor. Some prostate tumors are small, slow growing, and can be monitored closely without treatment. Other tumors are aggressive and can grow rapidly, requiring immediate intervention with hormonal therapy, radiation, or surgery.
But performing a thorough prostate biopsy can run into technical difficulties. The 12-point biopsy blindly samples tissue from across the prostate gland, but it can miss a cancer by not probing in the right places.
Several years ago, researchers at the NIH Clinical Center, Bethesda, MD, envisioned a solution. They’d use specially designed MRI images of a man’s prostate to guide the biopsy needle to areas in the prostate that look suspicious and deserve a closer look under a microscope.
Through a cooperative research-and-development agreement, NIH and the now- Florida-based Philips Healthcare created an office-based, outpatient prostate biopsy device, called UroNav, that was later approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The UroNav system relies on software that overlays MRI images highlighting suspicious areas onto real-time ultrasound images of the prostate that are traditionally used to guide biopsy procedures.
The new technology led to a large clinical study led by Peter Pinto, a researcher with NIH’s National Cancer Institute. The study results, published in 2015, found that the MRI-targeted approach was indeed superior to the 12-point biopsy at detecting aggressive prostate cancers .
But some doctors had questions about how best to implement the UroNav system and whether it could replace the 12-point biopsy. The uncertainty led to a second clinical study to nail down more answers, and the results were just published in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The research team enrolled 2,103 men who had visible prostate abnormalities on an MRI. Once in the study, each man underwent both the 12-point blind biopsy and the MRI-targeted approach—all in a single office visit. Based on this two-step approach, 1,312 people were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Of that total, 404 men had evidence of aggressive cancer, and had their prostates surgically removed.
The researchers then compared the diagnoses from each approach alone versus the two combined. The data showed that the combined biopsy found 208 cancers that the standard 12-point biopsy alone would have missed. Adding the MRI-targeted biopsy also helped doctors find and sample the more aggressive cancers. This allowed them to upgrade the diagnosis of 458 cancers to aggressive and in need of more full treatment.
Combining the two approaches also led to more accurate diagnoses. By carefully analyzing the 404 removed prostates and comparing them to the biopsy results, the researchers found the 12-point biopsy missed the most aggressive cancers about 40 percent of the time. But the MRI-targeted approach alone missed it about 30 percent of the time. Combined, they did much better, underestimating the severity of less than 15 percent of the cancers.
Even better, the combined biopsy missed only 3.5 percent of the most aggressive tumors. That’s compared to misses of about 17 percent for the most-aggressive cancers for the 12-point biopsy alone and about 9 percent for MRI-targeted biopsy alone.
It may take time for doctors to change how they detect prostate cancer in their practices. But the findings show that combining both approaches will significantly improve the accuracy of diagnosing prostate cancer. This will, in turn, help to reduce risk of suboptimal treatment (too much or too little) by allowing doctors and patients to feel more confident in the biopsy results. That should come as good news now and in the future for the families and friends of men who will need an accurate prostate biopsy to make informed treatment decisions.
 Cancer State Facts: Prostate Cancer. National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program.
 MRI-targeted, systematic, and combined biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis. Ahdoot M, Wilbur AR, Reese SE, Lebastchi AH, Mehralivand S, Gomella PT, Bloom J, Gurram S, Siddiqui M, Pinsky P, Parnes H, Linehan WM, Merino M, Choyke PL, Shih JH, Turkbey B, Wood BJ, Pinto PA. N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 5;382(10):917-928.
 Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Siddiqui M, Rais-Bahrami, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Parnes HL, Linehan WM, Merino MJ, Simon RM, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, and Pinto PA. JAMA. 2015 January 27;313(4):390-397.
Prostate Cancer (National Cancer Institute/NIH)
Video: MRI-Targeted Prostate Biopsy (YouTube)
Pinto Lab (National Cancer Institute/NIH)
NIH Support: National Cancer Institute; NIH Clinical Center
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
It was once a central tenet of biology that RNA molecules did their work inside the cell. But it’s now clear that RNA molecules are also active outside the cell, with potentially major implications for our health. To learn more about these unrecognized roles, the NIH Common Fund has launched the Extracellular RNA (exRNA) Communication Program.
This month, members of this research consortium described their latest progress in unraveling the secrets of exRNA in a group of 18 papers in the Cell family of journals. And it’s not just RNA that the consortium is studying, it’s also proteins. Among the many exciting results just published is the serendipitous discovery that proteins carried inside tiny, bubble-like vesicles, called exosomes, may influence a cancer’s response to immunotherapy . The work sheds light on why certain cancers are resistant to immunotherapy and points to new strategies for unleashing the immune system in the fight against cancer.
The new findings center on a type of immunotherapy drugs known as checkpoint inhibitors. They are monoclonal antibodies produced by industry that can boost the immune system’s ability to attack and treat cancer.
One of those antibodies specifically targets a protein, called PD-1, on the surface of certain immune cells. When PD-1 binds a similarly named protein, called PD-L1, on the surface of another cell, the interaction prevents immune cells from attacking. Some tumors seem to have learned this and load up on PD-L1 to evade the immune system.
That’s where checkpoint inhibitors come in. By blocking the interaction between PD-1 and PD-L1, the treatment removes a key check on the immune system, allowing certain immune cells to wake up and attack the tumor.
Checkpoint inhibitors work better in some cancer types than in others. In melanoma, for example, up to about 30 percent of patients respond to checkpoint inhibitor therapy. But in prostate cancer, response rates are in the single digits.
Researchers led by Robert Blelloch, a member of the exRNA consortium and a scientist at the University of California, San Francisco, wanted to know why. He and his team looked for clues in RNA within the cells taken from immunotherapy-resistant prostate cancers.
As published in Cell, the researchers got their first hint of something biologically intriguing in an apparent discrepancy in their data. As they expected from prior work, PD-L1 protein was present in the treatment-resistant cancers. But the PD-L1 messenger RNAs (mRNA), which serve as templates for producing the protein, told an unexpected story. The resistant cancer cells made far more PD-L1 mRNAs than needed to produce the modest levels of PD-L1 proteins detected inside the cells.
Where was the missing PD-L1? Blelloch’s team found it in exosomes. The cancer cells were packaging large quantities of the protein inside exosomes and secreting them out of the cell to other parts of the body.
In additional studies with a mouse model of prostate cancer, the researchers found that those PD-L1-packed exosomes travel through the blood and lymphatic systems to lymph nodes, the sites where immune cells become activated. Once there, PD-L1-laden exosomes put the immune system to sleep, preventing certain key cells from locating and attacking the cancer, including the primary tumor and places where it may have spread.
In important follow up studies, the researchers edited two genes in cancer cells to prevent them from producing exosomes. And, in the absence of exosomes, the cells no longer formed tumors. Importantly, both edited and unedited cells still produced PD-L1, but only those that exported PD-L1 in exosomes disarmed the immune system. Studies in a mouse model of immunotherapy-resistant colorectal cancer yielded similar results.
The new evidence suggests that blocking the release of PD-L1 in exosomes, even temporarily, might allow the immune system to launch a successful and sustained attack against a cancer.
Blelloch notes that many intriguing questions remain. For example, it’s not yet clear why antibodies that target PD-L1 on cancer cells don’t disable PD-L1 found in exosomes. The good news is that the new findings suggest it may be possible to find small molecules that do target PD-L1-packed exosomes, unleashing the immune system against cancers that don’t respond to existing checkpoint inhibitors. In fact, Blelloch’s team is already screening for small molecules that might fit the bill.
Since its launch about five years ago, the exRNA Communication Program has published an impressive 480 peer-reviewed papers, including the latest work in the Cell family of journals. I’d encourage readers to click on some of the other excellent work. I hear that another batch of papers will be published later this year.
 Suppression of exosomal PD-L induces systemic anti-tumor immunity and memory. Poggio M, Hu T, Pai CC, Chu B, Belair CD, Chang A, Montabana E, Lang UE, Fu Q, Fong L, Blelloch R. Cell. 2019 Apr 4;177(2):414-427.
Video: Unlocking the Mysteries of RNA Communication (Common Fund/NIH)
Immunotherapy to Treat Cancer (National Cancer Institute/NIH)
Blelloch Lab (University of California, San Francisco)
NIH Support: Common Fund; National Cancer Institute; National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Institute on Drug Abuse
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
Over the past few years, my blog has highlighted a wide range of Creative Minds from across biomedical research. But creative minds come in many forms, and, for a change of pace, I’d like to kick back this August and highlight some talented scientists who are also doing amazing things in the arts, from abstract painting to salsa dancing to rock’n’roll.
My first post introduces you to Dr. Pardis Sabeti, a computational geneticist at the Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard, Cambridge, and one of Time Magazine’s 2014 People of the Year for her work to contain the last major Ebola outbreak in West Africa. When she’s not in the lab studying viruses, Sabeti is the hard-driving voice of the indie rock band Thousand Days that has been rocking Boston for more than a decade.
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
We live in a world energized by technological advances, from that new app on your smartphone to drones and self-driving cars. As you can see from this video, NIH-supported researchers are also major contributors, developing a wide range of amazing biomedical technologies that offer tremendous potential to improve our health.
Produced by the NIH’s National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB), this video starts by showcasing some cool fluorescent markers that are custom-designed to light up specific cells in the body. This technology is already helping surgeons see and remove tumor cells with greater precision in people with head and neck cancer . Further down the road, it might also be used to light up nerves, which can be very difficult to see—and spare—during operations for cancer and other conditions.
Other great things to come include:
- A wearable tattoo that detects alcohol levels in perspiration and wirelessly transmits the information to a smartphone.
- Flexible coils that produce high quality images during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [2-3]. In the future, these individualized, screen-printed coils may improve the comfort and decrease the scan times of people undergoing MRI, especially infants and small children.
- A time-release capsule filled with a star-shaped polymer containing the anti-malarial drug ivermectin. The capsule slowly dissolves in the stomach over two weeks, with the goal of reducing the need for daily doses of ivermectin to prevent malaria infections in at-risk people .
- A new radiotracer to detect prostate cancer that has spread to other parts of the body. Early clinical trial results show the radiotracer, made up of carrier molecules bonded tightly to a radioactive atom, appears to be safe and effective .
- A new supercooling technique that promises to extend the time that organs donated for transplantation can remain viable outside the body [6-7]. For example, current technology can preserve donated livers outside the body for just 24 hours. In animal studies, this new technique quadruples that storage time to up to four days.
- A wearable skin patch with dissolvable microneedles capable of effectively delivering an influenza vaccine. This painless technology, which has produced promising early results in humans, may offer a simple, affordable alternative to needle-and-syringe immunization .
If you like what you see here, be sure to check out this previous NIH video that shows six more awesome biomedical technologies that your tax dollars are helping to create. So, let me extend a big thanks to you from those of us at NIH—and from all Americans who care about the future of their health—for your strong, continued support!
 Image-guided surgery in cancer: A strategy to reduce incidence of positive surgical margins. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2018 Feb 23.
 Screen-printed flexible MRI receive coils. Corea JR, Flynn AM, Lechêne B, Scott G, Reed GD, Shin PJ, Lustig M, Arias AC. Nat Commun. 2016 Mar 10;7:10839.
 Printed Receive Coils with High Acoustic Transparency for Magnetic Resonance Guided Focused Ultrasound. Corea J, Ye P, Seo D, Butts-Pauly K, Arias AC, Lustig M. Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 21;8(1):3392.
 Oral, ultra-long-lasting drug delivery: Application toward malaria elimination goals. Bellinger AM, Jafari M1, Grant TM, Zhang S, Slater HC, Wenger EA, Mo S, Lee YL, Mazdiyasni H, Kogan L, Barman R, Cleveland C, Booth L, Bensel T, Minahan D, Hurowitz HM, Tai T, Daily J, Nikolic B, Wood L, Eckhoff PA, Langer R, Traverso G. Sci Transl Med. 2016 Nov 16;8(365):365ra157.
 Clinical Translation of a Dual Integrin avb3– and Gastrin-Releasing Peptide Receptor–Targeting PET Radiotracer, 68Ga-BBN-RGD. Zhang J, Niu G, Lang L, Li F, Fan X, Yan X, Yao S, Yan W, Huo L, Chen L, Li Z, Zhu Z, Chen X. J Nucl Med. 2017 Feb;58(2):228-234.
 Supercooling enables long-term transplantation survival following 4 days of liver preservation. Berendsen TA, Bruinsma BG, Puts CF, Saeidi N, Usta OB, Uygun BE, Izamis ML, Toner M, Yarmush ML, Uygun K. Nat Med. 2014 Jul;20(7):790-793.
 The promise of organ and tissue preservation to transform medicine. Giwa S, Lewis JK, Alvarez L, Langer R, Roth AE, et a. Nat Biotechnol. 2017 Jun 7;35(6):530-542.
 The safety, immunogenicity, and acceptability of inactivated influenza vaccine delivered by microneedle patch (TIV-MNP 2015): a randomised, partly blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial. Rouphael NG, Paine M, Mosley R, Henry S, McAllister DV, Kalluri H, Pewin W, Frew PM, Yu T, Thornburg NJ, Kabbani S, Lai L, Vassilieva EV, Skountzou I, Compans RW, Mulligan MJ, Prausnitz MR; TIV-MNP 2015 Study Group.
Center for Wearable Sensors (University of California, San Diego)
Hyperpolarized MRI Technology Resource Center (University of California, San Francisco)
Center for Engineering in Medicine (Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston)
Center for Drug Design, Development and Delivery (Georgia Tech University, Atlanta)
NIH Support: National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases