PURPOSE: American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging is used to determine breast cancer prognosis, yet patient survival within each stage shows wide variation. We hypothesized that differences in biology influence this variation and that addition of biologic markers to AJCC staging improves determination of prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified a cohort of 3,728 patients who underwent surgery as the first intervention between 1997 and 2006. A Cox proportional hazards model, with backward stepwise exclusion of factors and stratification on pathologic stage (PS), was used to test the significance of adding grade (G), lymphovascular invasion (L), estrogen receptor (ER) status (E), progesterone receptor (PR) status, combined ER and PR status (EP), or combined ER, PR, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status (M). We assigned values of 0 to 2 to these disease-specific survival (DSS) -associated factors and assessed six different staging systems: PS, PS + G, PS + G L, PS + G E, PS + G EP, and PS + G M. We compared 5-year DSS rates, Akaike's information criterion (AIC), and Harrell's concordance index (C-index) between systems. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data were used as the external validation cohort (n = 26,711). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.5 years, and 5-year DSS rate was 97.4%. The PS + G E status staging system was most precise, with a low AIC (1,931.9) and the highest C-index (0.80). PS + G E status was confirmed to stratify outcomes in internal bootstrapping samples and the external validation cohort. CONCLUSION: Our results validate an improved breast cancer staging system that incorporates grade and ER status. We recommend that biologic markers be incorporated into revised versions of the AJCC staging system.
PURPOSE: American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging is used to determine breast cancer prognosis, yet patient survival within each stage shows wide variation. We hypothesized that differences in biology influence this variation and that addition of biologic markers to AJCC staging improves determination of prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified a cohort of 3,728 patients who underwent surgery as the first intervention between 1997 and 2006. A Cox proportional hazards model, with backward stepwise exclusion of factors and stratification on pathologic stage (PS), was used to test the significance of adding grade (G), lymphovascular invasion (L), estrogen receptor (ER) status (E), progesterone receptor (PR) status, combined ER and PR status (EP), or combined ER, PR, and humanepidermal growth factor receptor 2 status (M). We assigned values of 0 to 2 to these disease-specific survival (DSS) -associated factors and assessed six different staging systems: PS, PS + G, PS + G L, PS + G E, PS + G EP, and PS + G M. We compared 5-year DSS rates, Akaike's information criterion (AIC), and Harrell's concordance index (C-index) between systems. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data were used as the external validation cohort (n = 26,711). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.5 years, and 5-year DSS rate was 97.4%. The PS + G E status staging system was most precise, with a low AIC (1,931.9) and the highest C-index (0.80). PS + G E status was confirmed to stratify outcomes in internal bootstrapping samples and the external validation cohort. CONCLUSION: Our results validate an improved breast cancer staging system that incorporates grade and ER status. We recommend that biologic markers be incorporated into revised versions of the AJCC staging system.
Authors: Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Jacqueline S Jeruss; Susan L Tucker; Aparna Kolli; Lisa A Newman; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Thomas A Buchholz; Aysegul A Sahin; Janice N Cormier; Aman U Buzdar; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Kelly K Hunt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: T Sørlie; C M Perou; R Tibshirani; T Aas; S Geisler; H Johnsen; T Hastie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; T Thorsen; H Quist; J C Matese; P O Brown; D Botstein; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-09-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Rabab A A Mohammed; Stewart G Martin; Ali M Mahmmod; R Douglas Macmillan; Andrew R Green; Emma C Paish; Ian O Ellis Journal: J Pathol Date: 2010-12-06 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Malini Harigopal; William E Barlow; Greg Tedeschi; Peggy L Porter; I-Tien Yeh; Charles Haskell; Robert Livingston; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; George Sledge; Charles Shapiro; James N Ingle; David L Rimm; Daniel F Hayes Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2010-02-11 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Y H Park; S J Lee; E Y Cho; Y La Choi; J E Lee; S J Nam; J-H Yang; J H Shin; E Y Ko; B-K Han; J S Ahn; Y-H Im Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-01-17 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Nabil Wasif; Clifford Y Ko; James Farrell; Zev Wainberg; Oscar J Hines; Howard Reber; James S Tomlinson Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Emad A Rakha; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Frederick Baehner; David J Dabbs; Thomas Decker; Vincenzo Eusebi; Stephen B Fox; Shu Ichihara; Jocelyne Jacquemier; Sunil R Lakhani; José Palacios; Andrea L Richardson; Stuart J Schnitt; Fernando C Schmitt; Puay-Hoon Tan; Gary M Tse; Sunil Badve; Ian O Ellis Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2010-07-30 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Rashmi K Murthy; Juhee Song; Akshara S Raghavendra; Yisheng Li; Limin Hsu; Kenneth R Hess; Carlos H Barcenas; Vicente Valero; Robert W Carlson; Debu Tripathy; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: NPJ Breast Cancer Date: 2020-03-25
Authors: Angela K Green; Emeline M Aviki; Konstantina Matsoukas; Sujata Patil; Deborah Korenstein; Victoria Blinder Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-08-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Trevor A Ellison; Christopher L Wolfgang; Chanjuan Shi; John L Cameron; Peter Murakami; Liew Jun Mun; Aatur D Singhi; Toby C Cornish; Kelly Olino; Zina Meriden; Michael Choti; Luis A Diaz; Timothy M Pawlik; Richard D Schulick; Ralph H Hruban; Barish H Edil Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Jose Vila; Susan L Tucker; Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Benjamin D Smith; W Fraser Symmans; Aysegul A Sahin; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Kelly K Hunt Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Tamer M Fouad; Angelica M Gutierrez Barrera; James M Reuben; Anthony Lucci; Wendy A Woodward; Michael C Stauder; Bora Lim; Sarah M DeSnyder; Banu Arun; Babiera Gildy; Vicente Valero; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Naoto T Ueno Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Christina A Clarke; Daphne Y Lichtensztajn; Kelly K Hunt; Sharon H Giordano Journal: Oncologist Date: 2017-06-07
Authors: Shi-Yi Wang; Jessica B Long; Brigid K Killelea; Suzanne B Evans; Kenneth B Roberts; Andrea Silber; Cary P Gross Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Karla V Ballman; Linda M McCall; Min Yi; Aysegul A Sahin; Isabelle Bedrosian; Nora Hansen; Sheryl Gabram; Thelma Hurd; Armando E Giuliano; Kelly K Hunt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Elizabeth S Burnside; Karen Drukker; Hui Li; Ermelinda Bonaccio; Margarita Zuley; Marie Ganott; Jose M Net; Elizabeth J Sutton; Kathleen R Brandt; Gary J Whitman; Suzanne D Conzen; Li Lan; Yuan Ji; Yitan Zhu; Carl C Jaffe; Erich P Huang; John B Freymann; Justin S Kirby; Elizabeth A Morris; Maryellen L Giger Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 6.860