Literature DB >> 21189388

In patients younger than age 55 years with lymph node-negative breast cancer, proliferation by mitotic activity index is prognostically superior to adjuvant!

Tone Hoel Lende1, Emiel A M Janssen, Einar Gudlaugsson, Feja Voorhorst, Rune Smaaland, Paul van Diest, Håvard Søiland, Jan P A Baak.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In breast cancer, different tools are used for prognostication and adjuvant systemic therapy selection. We compared the accuracy of the online program Adjuvant!, the Norwegian Breast Cancer Group (NBCG) guidelines, and the proliferation factor mitotic activity index (MAI) in patients with lymph node (LN) -negative disease (pN0). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adjuvant! and MAI thresholds were set to 90% to 95% breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) rates. These thresholds were 95% for Adjuvant!, 3 for MAI, and as follows for NBCG: pT1 grade 1 + pT1a-b grade 2 to 3; all pN0M0 and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor positive versus all others. In 516 patients younger than age 55 years (T1-3N0M0) without adjuvant systemic therapy, univariable and multivariable 10-year BCSS rates were estimated.
RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 118 months. The concordance between MAI and Adjuvant! or NBCG was fair (κ = 0.35 and κ = 0.29, respectively). Adjuvant!, NBCG, and MAI were all prognostically significant (P ≤ .001). In the univariable analysis, the 10-year BCSS of MAI less than 3 versus ≥ 3 was 95% v 71%, respectively, with a hazard ratio of 7.0. In multivariable analysis, MAI was superior to Adjuvant! and NBCG. The 10-year survival of Adjuvant! ≥ 95% versus less than 95% was 91% v 74%, respectively, but stratification by MAI identified subgroups with different prognosis. Similar results occurred for NBCG and MAI. Adjuvant! and NBCG were not prognostic to each other.
CONCLUSION: MAI is superior to Adjuvant! and NBCG in prognostication of patients with LN-negative breast cancer younger than age 55 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21189388     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.0407

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


  12 in total

1.  Mitotic rate in melanoma: prognostic value of immunostaining and computer-assisted image analysis.

Authors:  Christopher S Hale; Meng Qian; Michelle W Ma; Patrick Scanlon; Russell S Berman; Richard L Shapiro; Anna C Pavlick; Yongzhao Shao; David Polsky; Iman Osman; Farbod Darvishian
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.394

Review 2.  Molecular tests as prognostic factors in breast cancer.

Authors:  Marc J van de Vijver
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Macrophage migratory inhibitory factor promotes bladder cancer progression via increasing proliferation and angiogenesis.

Authors:  Shilpa Choudhary; Poornima Hegde; James R Pruitt; Thais M Sielecki; Dharamainder Choudhary; Kristen Scarpato; David J Degraff; Carol C Pilbeam; John A Taylor
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 4.944

4.  Significance of histomorphology of early triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Gábor Rubovszky; Zsolt Horváth; Erika Tóth; István Láng; Miklós Kásler
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 3.201

5.  Validation of expression patterns for nine miRNAs in 204 lymph-node negative breast cancers.

Authors:  Kristin Jonsdottir; Susanne R Janssen; Fabiana C Da Rosa; Einar Gudlaugsson; Ivar Skaland; Jan P A Baak; Emiel A M Janssen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  External validation of Adjuvant! Online breast cancer prognosis tool. Prioritising recommendations for improvement.

Authors:  David Hajage; Yann de Rycke; Marc Bollet; Alexia Savignoni; Martial Caly; Jean-Yves Pierga; Hugo M Horlings; Marc J Van de Vijver; Anne Vincent-Salomon; Brigitte Sigal-Zafrani; Claire Senechal; Bernard Asselain; Xavier Sastre; Fabien Reyal
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Prediction models for breast cancer prognosis among Asian women.

Authors:  Run Fan; Yufan Chen; Sarah Nechuta; Hui Cai; Kai Gu; Liang Shi; Pingping Bao; Yu Shyr; Xiao-Ou Shu; Fei Ye
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 6.921

8.  Pathological non-response to chemotherapy in a neoadjuvant setting of breast cancer: an inter-institutional study.

Authors:  D Balmativola; C Marchiò; M Maule; L Chiusa; L Annaratone; F Maletta; F Montemurro; J Kulka; P Figueiredo; Z Varga; I Liepniece-Karele; G Cserni; E Arkoumani; I Amendoeira; G Callagy; A Reiner-Concin; A Cordoba; S Bianchi; T Decker; D Gläser; C Focke; P van Diest; D Grabau; E Lips; J Wesseling; R Arisio; E Medico; C Wells; A Sapino
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Can proliferation biomarkers reliably predict recurrence in World Health Organization 2003 defined endometrial stromal sarcoma, low grade?

Authors:  Weiwei Feng; Anais Malpica; Ivar Skaland; Einar Gudlaugsson; Stanley J Robboy; Ingvild Dalen; Keqin Hua; Xianrong Zhou; Jan P A Baak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The prognostic value of mitotic activity index (MAI), phosphohistone H3 (PPH3), cyclin B1, cyclin A, and Ki67, alone and in combinations, in node-negative premenopausal breast cancer.

Authors:  Marie Klintman; Carina Strand; Cecilia Ahlin; Sanda Beglerbegovic; Marie-Louise Fjällskog; Dorthe Grabau; Einar Gudlaugsson; Emiel A M Janssen; Kristina Lövgren; Ivar Skaland; Pär-Ola Bendahl; Per Malmström; Jan P A Baak; Mårten Fernö
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.