Literature DB >> 25932963

Reproducibility of residual cancer burden for prognostic assessment of breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Florentia Peintinger1, Bruno Sinn2, Christos Hatzis3, Constance Albarracin2, Erinn Downs-Kelly4, Jerzy Morkowski5, Rebekah Gould2, W Fraser Symmans2.   

Abstract

The residual cancer burden index was developed as a method to quantify residual disease ranging from pathological complete response to extensive residual disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-Pathologist reproducibility in the residual cancer burden index score and category, and in their long-term prognostic utility. Pathology slides and pathology reports of 100 cases from patients treated in a randomized neoadjuvant trial were reviewed independently by five pathologists. The size of tumor bed, average percent overall tumor cellularity, average percent of the in situ cancer within the tumor bed, size of largest axillary metastasis, and number of involved nodes were assessed separately by each pathologist and residual cancer burden categories were assigned to each case following calculation of the numerical residual cancer burden index score. Inter-Pathologist agreement in the assessment of the continuous residual cancer burden score and its components and agreement in the residual cancer burden category assignments were analyzed. The overall concordance correlation coefficient for the agreement in residual cancer burden score among pathologists was 0.931 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.908-0.949). Overall accuracy of the residual cancer burden score determination was 0.989. The kappa coefficient for overall agreement in the residual cancer burden category assignments was 0.583 (95% CI 0.539-0.626). The metastatic component of the residual cancer burden index showed stronger concordance between pathologists (overall concordance correlation coefficient=0.980; 95% CI 0.954-0.992), than the primary component (overall concordance correlation coefficient=0.795; 95% CI 0.716-0.853). At a median follow-up of 12 years residual cancer burden determined by each of the pathologists had the same prognostic accuracy for distant recurrence-free and survival (overall concordance correlation coefficient=0.995; 95% CI 0.989-0.998). Residual cancer burden assessment is highly reproducible, with reproducible long-term prognostic significance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25932963      PMCID: PMC4830087          DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2015.53

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  14 in total

1.  Number of lymph nodes identified at axillary dissection: effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and other factors.

Authors:  Judy C Boughey; John H Donohue; James W Jakub; Christine M Lohse; Amy C Degnim
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Prognostic and predictive value of centrally reviewed expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors in a randomized trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal early breast cancer: BIG 1-98.

Authors:  Giuseppe Viale; Meredith M Regan; Eugenio Maiorano; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Patrizia Dell'Orto; Birgitte Bruun Rasmussen; Johnny Raffoul; Patrick Neven; Zsolt Orosz; Stephen Braye; Christian Ohlschlegel; Beat Thürlimann; Richard D Gelber; Monica Castiglione-Gertsch; Karen N Price; Aron Goldhirsch; Barry A Gusterson; Alan S Coates
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-08-06       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Measurement of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Catherine Abrial; Emilie Thivat; Olivier Tacca; Xavier Durando; Marie-Ange Mouret-Reynier; Pierre Gimbergues; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Philippe Chollet
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-06-20       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Assessment of CAD-generated tumor volumes measured using MRI in breast cancers before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Kazuna Takeda; Shotaro Kanao; Tomohisa Okada; Masako Kataoka; Takayuki Ueno; Masakazu Toi; Hiroshi Ishiguro; Yoshiki Mikami; Kaori Togashi
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 5.  Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis.

Authors:  Patricia Cortazar; Lijun Zhang; Michael Untch; Keyur Mehta; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark; Hervé Bonnefoi; David Cameron; Luca Gianni; Pinuccia Valagussa; Sandra M Swain; Tatiana Prowell; Sibylle Loibl; D Lawrence Wickerham; Jan Bogaerts; Jose Baselga; Charles Perou; Gideon Blumenthal; Jens Blohmer; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Jonas Bergh; Vladimir Semiglazov; Robert Justice; Holger Eidtmann; Soonmyung Paik; Martine Piccart; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Peter A Fasching; Leen Slaets; Shenghui Tang; Bernd Gerber; Charles E Geyer; Richard Pazdur; Nina Ditsch; Priya Rastogi; Wolfgang Eiermann; Gunter von Minckwitz
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Estrogen- and progesterone-receptor status in ECOG 2197: comparison of immunohistochemistry by local and central laboratories and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction by central laboratory.

Authors:  Sunil S Badve; Frederick L Baehner; Robert P Gray; Barrett H Childs; Tara Maddala; Mei-Lan Liu; Steve C Rowley; Steven Shak; Edith A Perez; Edith D Perez; Lawrence J Shulman; Silvana Martino; Nancy E Davidson; George W Sledge; Lori J Goldstein; Joseph A Sparano
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  W Fraser Symmans; Florentia Peintinger; Christos Hatzis; Radhika Rajan; Henry Kuerer; Vicente Valero; Lina Assad; Anna Poniecka; Bryan Hennessy; Marjorie Green; Aman U Buzdar; S Eva Singletary; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Lajos Pusztai
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-09-04       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Facilitating consensus by examining patterns of treatment effects.

Authors:  Richard D Gelber; Shari Gelber
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.380

9.  An international Ki67 reproducibility study.

Authors:  Mei-Yin C Polley; Samuel C Y Leung; Lisa M McShane; Dongxia Gao; Judith C Hugh; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Giuseppe Viale; Lila A Zabaglo; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; John M S Bartlett; Allen M Gown; W Fraser Symmans; Tammy Piper; Erika Mehl; Rebecca A Enos; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; Torsten O Nielsen
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  A central review of histopathology reports after breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the neo-tango trial.

Authors:  E Provenzano; A-L Vallier; R Champ; K Walland; S Bowden; A Grier; N Fenwick; J Abraham; M Iddawela; C Caldas; L Hiller; J Dunn; H M Earl
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  28 in total

1.  A Randomized Phase II Neoadjuvant Study of Cisplatin, Paclitaxel With or Without Everolimus in Patients with Stage II/III Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC): Responses and Long-term Outcome Correlated with Increased Frequency of DNA Damage Response Gene Mutations, TNBC Subtype, AR Status, and Ki67.

Authors:  Bojana Jovanović; Ingrid A Mayer; Erica L Mayer; Vandana G Abramson; Aditya Bardia; Melinda E Sanders; M Gabriela Kuba; Monica V Estrada; J Scott Beeler; Timothy M Shaver; Kimberly C Johnson; Violeta Sanchez; Jennifer M Rosenbluth; Patrick M Dillon; Andres Forero-Torres; Jenny C Chang; Ingrid M Meszoely; Ana M Grau; Brian D Lehmann; Yu Shyr; Quanhu Sheng; Sheau-Chiann Chen; Carlos L Arteaga; Jennifer A Pietenpol
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancers.

Authors:  Shahla Masood
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2016-09

3.  Long-Term Prognostic Risk After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Associated With Residual Cancer Burden and Breast Cancer Subtype.

Authors:  W Fraser Symmans; Caimiao Wei; Rebekah Gould; Xian Yu; Ya Zhang; Mei Liu; Andrew Walls; Alex Bousamra; Maheshwari Ramineni; Bruno Sinn; Kelly Hunt; Thomas A Buchholz; Vicente Valero; Aman U Buzdar; Wei Yang; Abenaa M Brewster; Stacy Moulder; Lajos Pusztai; Christos Hatzis; Gabriel N Hortobagyi
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 4.  Neoadjuvant Trials in ER+ Breast Cancer: A Tool for Acceleration of Drug Development and Discovery.

Authors:  Angel L Guerrero-Zotano; Carlos L Arteaga
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 39.397

Review 5.  Biomarkers of residual disease after neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Frederique Penault-Llorca; Nina Radosevic-Robin
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Post prostatectomy outcomes of patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated with neoadjuvant androgen blockade.

Authors:  Rana R McKay; Bruce Montgomery; Wanling Xie; Zhenwei Zhang; Glenn J Bubley; David W Lin; Mark A Preston; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Peter Chang; Andrew A Wagner; Elahe A Mostaghel; Philip W Kantoff; Peter S Nelson; Adam S Kibel; Mary-Ellen Taplin
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 5.554

7.  Central pathology review with two-stage quality assurance for pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the ARTemis Trial.

Authors:  Jeremy St John Thomas; Elena Provenzano; Louise Hiller; Janet Dunn; Clare Blenkinsop; Louise Grybowicz; Anne-Laure Vallier; Ioannis Gounaris; Jean Abraham; Luke Hughes-Davies; Karen McAdam; Stephen Chan; Rizvana Ahmad; Tamas Hickish; Stephen Houston; Daniel Rea; Carlos Caldas; John Ms Bartlett; David Allan Cameron; Richard Laurence Hayward; Helena Margaret Earl
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 7.842

8.  The ever-evolving role of pathologists in the management of breast cancer with neoadjuvant treatment: recommendations based on the Spanish clinical experience.

Authors:  O Burgués; Mª Á López-García; B Pérez-Míes; P Santiago; B Vieites; J F García; V Peg
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 3.405

9.  Standardization of pathologic evaluation and reporting of postneoadjuvant specimens in clinical trials of breast cancer: recommendations from an international working group.

Authors:  Elena Provenzano; Veerle Bossuyt; Giuseppe Viale; David Cameron; Sunil Badve; Carsten Denkert; Gaëtan MacGrogan; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Judy Boughey; Giuseppe Curigliano; J Michael Dixon; Laura Esserman; Gerd Fastner; Thorsten Kuehn; Florentia Peintinger; Gunter von Minckwitz; Julia White; Wei Yang; W Fraser Symmans
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 7.842

10.  Automatic cellularity assessment from post-treated breast surgical specimens.

Authors:  Mohammad Peikari; Sherine Salama; Sharon Nofech-Mozes; Anne L Martel
Journal:  Cytometry A       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 4.355

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.