| Literature DB >> 23894276 |
Yesim Gökmen-Polar1, Robert W Cook, Chirayu Pankaj Goswami, Jeff Wilkinson, Derek Maetzold, John F Stone, Kristen M Oelschlager, Ioan Tudor Vladislav, Kristen L Shirar, Kenneth A Kesler, Patrick J Loehrer, Sunil Badve.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Thymoma represents one of the rarest of all malignancies. Stage and completeness of resection have been used to ascertain postoperative therapeutic strategies albeit with limited prognostic accuracy. A molecular classifier would be useful to improve the assessment of metastatic behaviour and optimize patient management.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23894276 PMCID: PMC3722217 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066047
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline demographics of training set and independent validation set.
|
|
| |||
| Metastatic | Non-Metastatic | Metastatic | Nonmetastatic | |
| ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| Median MFS/Followup (range) | 0.86 (0–13.0) | 8.41 (5.1–18.1) | 2.35 (0–11.2) | 1.87 (0.1–13.8) |
| Median Age (range) | 46 (34–85) | 48 (31–62) | 43 (27–68) | 57 (18–79) |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 6 (29%) | 5 (33%) | 17 (53%) | 16 (37%) |
| Female | 15 (71%) | 10 (67%) | 15 (47%) | 27 (63%) |
| Masaoka Stage | ||||
| I | 2 (10%) | 10 (67%) | 6 (19%) | 16 (37%) |
| II | 3 (14%) | 5 (33%) | 3 (9%) | 13 (28%) |
| III | 5 (24%) | 0 (0%) | 13 (41%) | 14 (33%) |
| IV | 11 (52%) | 0 (0%) | 10 (31%) | 0 (0%) |
| WHO Classification | ||||
| A | 1 (5%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 7 (16%) |
| AB | 3 (14%) | 5 (33%) | 3 (9%) | 15 (35%) |
| B1 | 1 (5%) | 4 (27%) | 10 (31%) | 7 (16%) |
| B2 | 8 (38%) | 3 (20%) | 14 (44%) | 12 (28%) |
| B3 | 8 (38%) | 3 (20%) | 4 (13%) | 2 (5%) |
| Extent of Resection | ||||
| No evidence of disease | 9 (43%) | 14 (93%) | 14 (44%) | 37 (86%) |
| Residual disease | 12 (57%) | 1 (7%) | 18 (56%) | 6 (14%) |
| Autoimmune Disease | ||||
| Yes | 10 (48%) | 7 (47%) | 11 (34%) | 12 (28%) |
| No/not stated | 11 (52%) | 7 (47%) | 21 (66%) | 31 (73%) |
| Adjuvant CT and/or RT | ||||
| Surgery alone | 3 (14%) | 12 (80%) | 6 (19%) | 29 (67%) |
| Chemotherapy | 2 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (3%) | 1 (2%) |
| Surgery/CT | 8 (38%) | 1 (7%) | 9 (28%) | 6 (14%) |
| Surgery/RT | 4 (19%) | 3 (20%) | 6 (19%) | 4 (9%) |
| Trimodal therapy | 3 (14%) | 0 (0%) | 9 (28%) | 2 (5%) |
CT, chemotherapy; MFS, metastasis-free survival; RT, radiation therapy.
The 9- gene panel to determine the metastatic behavior of thymomas.
| Genes with increased expression in tumors with metastatic behavior | Genes with decreased expression in tumors with metastatic behavior | Reference genes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||
|
|
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier curves for metastasis-free survival (MFS) in the training set cohort of samples.
MFS is grouped according to Masaoka staging (A), WHO classification (B), extent of resection (C), or predicted nine-gene signature class 1 (low metastatic potential) or class 2 (high metastatic potential) as determined by radial basis machine predictive modeling algorithm (D). Numbers of cases at risk at two-year time points are shown below each graph, and 5- and 10-year MFS is presented. P values for each classification system were calculated by log-rank method. GEP, gene expression profile; NED, no evidence of disease; RD, residual disease, WHO, World Health Organization.
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier curves for metastasis-free survival (MFS) in the validation set cohort of samples.
MFS is grouped according to Masaoka staging (A), WHO classification (B), extent of resection (C), or predicted nine-gene signature class 1 (low metastatic potential) or class 2 (high metastatic potential) as determined by radial basis machine predictive modeling algorithm (D). Numbers of cases at risk at two-year time points are shown below each graph, and 5- and 10-year MFS is presented. P values for each classification system were calculated by log-rank method. GEP, gene expression profile; NED, no evidence of disease; RD, residual disease, WHO, World Health Organization.
Accuracy of nonlinear modeling algorithms for predicting metastatic risk in a 75-sample thymoma validation set.
| Predictive Model | ROC | Sensitivity | Kaplan–Meier |
| Radial basis machine | 0.86 | 0.94 | 0.0004 |
| K-nearest neighbor | 0.85 | 0.94 | 0.0011 |
| Partition tree | 0.85 | 0.91 | 0.0019 |
| Distance scoring | 0.84 | 0.88 | 0.0029 |
ROC, receiver operator characteristic curve.
Univariate and multivariate analysis of the independent 75-sample validation set.
| Cox univariate analysis | Cox multivariate analysis | Kaplan-Meier | |||
| HR ( | 95% CI | HR ( | 95% CI |
| |
| Age >50 years | 0.43 (0.028) | 0.20–0.91 | 0.50 (0.128) | 0.21–1.22 | 0.0207 |
| Gender | 1.18 (0.648) | 0.58–2.38 | – | – | – |
| Autoimmune disease | 1.42 (0.353) | 0.68–2.99 | – | – | – |
| Residual disease | 2.51 (0.012) | 1.22–5.15 | 1.76 (0.214) | 0.72–4.31 | 0.0081 |
| Stage III/IV | 2.09 (0.067) | 0.95–4.59 | – | – | – |
| WHO class | 1.46 (0.116) | 0.91–2.33 | – | – | – |
| GEP Class 2 (high risk) | 8.33 (0.004) | 1.99–34.9 | 5.26 (0.036) | 1.12–24.8 | 0.0004 |
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.
.