Literature DB >> 16505412

Multicenter validation of a gene expression-based prognostic signature in lymph node-negative primary breast cancer.

John A Foekens1, David Atkins, Yi Zhang, Fred C G J Sweep, Nadia Harbeck, Angelo Paradiso, Tanja Cufer, Anieta M Sieuwerts, Dmitri Talantov, Paul N Span, Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen, Alfredo F Zito, Katja Specht, Heinz Hoefler, Rastko Golouh, Francesco Schittulli, Manfred Schmitt, Louk V A M Beex, Jan G M Klijn, Yixin Wang.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We previously identified in a single-center study a 76-gene prognostic signature for lymph node-negative (LNN) breast cancer patients. The aim of this study was to validate this gene signature in an independent more diverse population of LNN patients from multiple institutions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using custom-designed DNA chips we analyzed the expression of the 76 genes in RNA of frozen tumor samples from 180 LNN patients who did not receive adjuvant systemic treatment.
RESULTS: In this independent validation, the 76-gene signature was highly informative in identifying patients with distant metastasis within 5 years (hazard ratio, [HR], 7.41; 95% CI, 2.63 to 20.9), even when corrected for traditional prognostic factors in multivariate analysis (HR, 11.36; 95% CI, 2.67 to 48.4). The actuarial 5- and 10-year distant metastasis-free survival were 96% (95% CI, 89% to 99%) and 94% (95% CI, 83% to 98%), respectively, for the good profile group and 74% (95% CI, 64% to 81%) and 65% (53% to 74%), respectively for the poor profile group. The sensitivity for 5-yr distant metastasis-free survival was 90%, and the specificity was 50%. The positive and negative predictive values were 38% (95% CI, 29% to 47%) and 94% (95% CI, 86% to 97%), respectively. The 76-gene signature was confirmed as a strong prognostic factor in subgroups of estrogen receptor-positive patients, pre- and postmenopausal patients, and patients with tumor sizes 20 mm or smaller. The subgroup of patients with estrogen receptor-negative tumors was considered too small to perform a separate analysis.
CONCLUSION: Our data provide a strong methodologic and clinical multicenter validation of the predefined prognostic 76-gene signature in LNN breast cancer patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16505412     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.9115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  79 in total

1.  Attitudes toward information about genetic risk for cognitive impairment after cancer chemotherapy: breast cancer survivors compared with healthy controls.

Authors:  Michael A Andrykowski; Jessica L Burris; Erin Walsh; Brent J Small; Paul B Jacobsen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  ANCCA/ATAD2 overexpression identifies breast cancer patients with poor prognosis, acting to drive proliferation and survival of triple-negative cells through control of B-Myb and EZH2.

Authors:  Ekaterina V Kalashnikova; Alexey S Revenko; Abigael T Gemo; Nicolas P Andrews; Clifford G Tepper; June X Zou; Robert D Cardiff; Alexander D Borowsky; Hong-Wu Chen
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 12.701

3.  Node-Negative Breast Cancer: Which Patients Should Be Treated?

Authors:  Marcus Schmidt
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2008-08-20       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 4.  Molecular profiling in breast cancer.

Authors:  Shannon R Morris; Lisa A Carey
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 6.514

Review 5.  Metastatic gene signatures and emerging novel prognostic tests in the management of early stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Attila Tordai; Cornelia Liedtke; Lajos Pusztai
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  2009-04-18       Impact factor: 5.150

6.  Clinical utility of multigene profiling assays in early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  M C Chang; L H Souter; S Kamel-Reid; M Rutherford; P Bedard; M Trudeau; J Hart; A Eisen
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 7.  Current potential and limitations of molecular diagnostic methods in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Magdy E Mahfouz; Juan P Rodrigo; Robert P Takes; Mohamed N Elsheikh; Alessandra Rinaldo; Ruud H Brakenhoff; Alfio Ferlito
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.503

8.  Más-o-menos: a simple sign averaging method for discrimination in genomic data analysis.

Authors:  Sihai Dave Zhao; Giovanni Parmigiani; Curtis Huttenhower; Levi Waldron
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 9.  Gene expression profiling of breast cancer.

Authors:  Ting Bao; Nancy E Davidson
Journal:  Adv Surg       Date:  2008

10.  Prognostic relevance of glucosylceramide synthase (GCS) expression in breast cancer.

Authors:  Eugen Ruckhäberle; Thomas Karn; Lars Hanker; Regine Gätje; Dirk Metzler; Uwe Holtrich; Manfred Kaufmann; Achim Rody
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 4.553

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.