Literature DB >> 16409585

Ascertaining prognosis for breast cancer in node-negative patients with innovative survival analysis.

Judith-Anne W Chapman1, H Lavina A Lickley, Maureen E Trudeau, Wedad M Hanna, Harriette J Kahn, David Murray, Carol A Sawka, Betty G Mobbs, David R McCready, Kathleen I Pritchard.   

Abstract

Clinical decisions to administer adjuvant systemic therapy to women with early breast cancer require knowledge about baseline prognosis, which is only assessable in the absence of such adjuvant treatment, which most patients currently do receive. The Cox model is the standard tool for assessing the effect of prognostic factors; however, there may be substantive differences in the estimated prognosis obtained by the Cox model rather than a log-normal model. For more than 50 years, clinical breast cancer data for cohorts of patients have supported the choice of a log-normal model. The prognostic impact of model type is examined here for a cohort of breast cancer patients, only 7% of whom received adjuvant systemic therapy. We quantitated prognosis utilizing Kaplan-Meier, Cox, and log-normal survival analyses for 415 consecutive T1-T3, M0, histologically node-negative patients who were operated on for primary breast cancer at Women's College Hospital between 1977 and 1986. Recurrence outside the breast for disease-free interval (DFI) and breast cancer death for disease-specific survival (DSS) were the events of interest. The patient follow-up for these investigations was 96% complete: a median 8 years for those surviving. Factors used in these investigations were age, weight, tumor size, histology, tumor grade, nuclear grade, lymphovascular invasion, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), combined ER/PR receptor, overexpression of neu oncoprotein, DNA ploidy, S-phase, and adjuvant therapy. In our study we found evidence against the Cox assumption of proportional hazards, which is not an assumption for the log-normal approach. We identified patients with greater than 96% and others with less than 40% DSS at 10 years. The difference in prognosis determined by using the Cox versus the log-normal model ranged for DFI from 1.2% to 8.1%, and for DSS from 0.4% to 6.2%; interestingly, the difference was more substantial for patients with a high risk of recurrence or death from breast cancer. Estimated prognoses may differ substantially by survival analysis model type, by amounts that might affect patient management, and we think that the log-normal model has a major advantage over the Cox model for survival analysis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16409585     DOI: 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00183.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast J        ISSN: 1075-122X            Impact factor:   2.431


  10 in total

1.  Nomogram for predicting the benefit of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resected gallbladder cancer.

Authors:  Samuel J Wang; Andrew Lemieux; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Celine B Ord; Gary V Walker; C David Fuller; Jong-Sung Kim; Charles R Thomas
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Parametric survival models for predicting the benefit of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in gallbladder cancer.

Authors:  Samuel J Wang; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Jong Sung Kim; C David Fuller; Charles R Thomas
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2010-11-13

3.  Avoiding Pitfalls in the Statistical Analysis of Heterogeneous Tumors.

Authors:  David E Axelrod; Naomi Miller; Judith-Anne W Chapman
Journal:  Biomed Inform Insights       Date:  2009-01-01

4.  Competing causes of death from a randomized trial of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Judith-Anne W Chapman; Daniel Meng; Lois Shepherd; Wendy Parulekar; James N Ingle; Hyman B Muss; Michael Palmer; Changhong Yu; Paul E Goss
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-02-12       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Considerations in the statistical analysis of hemodialysis patient survival.

Authors:  Christos Argyropoulos; Chung-Chou H Chang; Laura Plantinga; Nancy Fink; Neil Powe; Mark Unruh
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 10.121

6.  Breast Cancer Survival Analysis: Applying the Generalized Gamma Distribution under Different Conditions of the Proportional Hazards and Accelerated Failure Time Assumptions.

Authors:  Alireza Abadi; Farzaneh Amanpour; Chris Bajdik; Parvin Yavari
Journal:  Int J Prev Med       Date:  2012-09

7.  Disease-specific survival for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer affected by statistical method of assessment.

Authors:  Patricia Tai; Judith-Anne W Chapman; Edward Yu; Dennie Jones; Changhong Yu; Fei Yuan; Lee Sang-Joon
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Development and validation of a nomogram for survival benefit of lymphadenectomy in resected gallbladder cancer.

Authors:  Mingyu Chen; Jian Lin; Jiasheng Cao; Hepan Zhu; Bin Zhang; Angela Wu; Xiujun Cai
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 7.293

9.  Mean overall survival gain with aflibercept plus FOLFIRI vs placebo plus FOLFIRI in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  F Joulain; I Proskorovsky; C Allegra; J Tabernero; M Hoyle; S U Iqbal; E Van Cutsem
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Effect of continuous statistically standardized measures of estrogen and progesterone receptors on disease-free survival in NCIC CTG MA.12 Trial and BC Cohort.

Authors:  Judith-Anne W Chapman; Torsten O Nielsen; Matthew J Ellis; Phillip Bernard; Stephen Chia; Karen A Gelmon; Kathleen I Pritchard; Aurelie Le Maitre; Paul E Goss; Samuel Leung; Lois E Shepherd; Vivien H C Bramwell
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 6.466

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.