Literature DB >> 26583684

Using a gene expression signature when controversy exists regarding the indication for adjuvant systemic treatment reduces the proportion of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: a nationwide study.

A Kuijer1, A C M van Bommel2, C A Drukker3, M van der Heiden-van der Loo4, C H Smorenburg5, P J Westenend6, S C Linn5, E J Th Rutgers7, S G Elias8, Th van Dalen1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The Dutch national guideline advises use of gene-expression signatures, such as the 70-gene signature (70-GS), in case of ambivalence regarding the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT). In this nationwide study, the impact of 70-GS use on the administration of CT in early breast cancer patients with a dubious indication for CT is assessed.
METHODS: Patients within a national guideline directed indication area for 70-GS use who were surgically treated between November 2011 and April 2013 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry database. The effect of 70-GS use on the administration of CT was evaluated in guideline- and age-delineated subgroups addressing potential effect of bias by linear mixed-effect modeling and instrumental variable (IV) analyses.
RESULTS: A total of 2,043 patients within the indicated area for 70-GS use were included, of whom 298 received a 70-GS. Without use of the 70-GS, 45% of patients received CT. The 70-GS use was associated with a 9.5% decrease in CT administration (95% confidence interval (CI): -15.7 to -3.3%) in linear mixed-effect model analyses and IV analyses showed similar results (-9.9%; 95% CI: -19.3 to -0.4).
CONCLUSION: In patients in whom the Dutch national guidelines suggest the use of a gene-expression profile, 70-GS use is associated with a 10% decrease in the administration of adjuvant CT.Genet Med 18 7, 720-726.Genetics in Medicine (2016); 18 7, 720-726. doi:10.1038/gim.2015.152.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26583684     DOI: 10.1038/gim.2015.152

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  27 in total

1.  The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  M H Galea; R W Blamey; C E Elston; I O Ellis
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  European inter-institutional impact study of MammaPrint.

Authors:  P G Cusumano; D Generali; E Ciruelos; L Manso; I Ghanem; E Lifrange; G Jerusalem; J Klaase; F de Snoo; L Stork-Sloots; L Dekker-Vroling; M Lutke Holzik
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 4.380

3.  The effects of oncotype DX recurrence scores on chemotherapy utilization in a multi-institutional breast cancer cohort.

Authors:  Foluso O Ademuyiwa; Austin Miller; Tracey O'Connor; Stephen B Edge; Mangesh A Thorat; George W Sledge; Ellis Levine; Sunil Badve
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-01-01       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  The 70-gene signature as a response predictor for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  Marieke E Straver; Annuska M Glas; Juliane Hannemann; Jelle Wesseling; Marc J van de Vijver; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters; Harm van Tinteren; Laura J Van't Veer; Sjoerd Rodenhuis
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2009-02-13       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Analysis of the MammaPrint breast cancer assay in a predominantly postmenopausal cohort.

Authors:  Ben S Wittner; Dennis C Sgroi; Paula D Ryan; Tako J Bruinsma; Annuska M Glas; Anitha Male; Sonika Dahiya; Karleen Habin; Rene Bernards; Daniel A Haber; Laura J Van't Veer; Sridhar Ramaswamy
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-05-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy. 133 randomised trials involving 31,000 recurrences and 24,000 deaths among 75,000 women. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1992-01-11       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  The 70-gene prognosis signature predicts early metastasis in breast cancer patients between 55 and 70 years of age.

Authors:  S Mook; M K Schmidt; B Weigelt; B Kreike; I Eekhout; M J van de Vijver; A M Glas; A Floore; E J T Rutgers; L J van 't Veer
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2009-10-13       Impact factor: 32.976

8.  Potential impact of the 70-gene signature in the choice of adjuvant systemic treatment for ER positive, HER2 negative tumors: a single institution experience.

Authors:  R Torrisi; C A Garcia-Etienne; A Losurdo; E Morenghi; L Di Tommaso; W Gatzemeier; A Sagona; B Fernandes; C Rossetti; M Eboli; A Rubino; E Barbieri; C Andreoli; S Orefice; C Gandini; S Rota; M Zuradelli; G Masci; A Santoro; C Tinterri
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 4.380

9.  Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Marc Buyse; Sherene Loi; Laura van't Veer; Giuseppe Viale; Mauro Delorenzi; Annuska M Glas; Mahasti Saghatchian d'Assignies; Jonas Bergh; Rosette Lidereau; Paul Ellis; Adrian Harris; Jan Bogaerts; Patrick Therasse; Arno Floore; Mohamed Amakrane; Fanny Piette; Emiel Rutgers; Christos Sotiriou; Fatima Cardoso; Martine J Piccart
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  The multigene signature MammaPrint impacts on multidisciplinary team decisions in ER+, HER2- early breast cancer.

Authors:  R Exner; Z Bago-Horvath; R Bartsch; M Mittlboeck; V P Retèl; F Fitzal; M Rudas; C Singer; G Pfeiler; M Gnant; R Jakesz; P Dubsky
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  6 in total

1.  Use and Impact of the 21-Gene Recurrence Score in Relation to the Clinical Risk of Developing Metastases in Early Breast Cancer Patients in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Kay Schreuder; Anne Kuijer; Sanne Bentum; Thijs van Dalen; Sabine Siesling
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 2.000

2.  Correlation analysis between molecular subtypes and Nottingham Prognostic Index in breast cancer.

Authors:  Hongchao Zhen; Liuting Yang; Li Li; Junxian Yu; Lei Zhao; Yingying Li; Qin Li
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-05-27

3.  Characteristics and prognostic values of traditional pathological parameters and advanced molecular subtypes in women in Beijing with operable breast cancer: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Qin Li; Li Li; Xiaoyue Jiang; Qi Du; Yingrui Li; Teng Li; Hong Gong; Bangwei Cao
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  The Changing Role of Gene-Expression Profiling in the Era of De-escalating Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  J E C van Steenhoven; A Kuijer; K Schreuder; S G Elias; P J van Diest; E van der Wall; S Siesling; T van Dalen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Comprehensive trends in incidence, treatment, survival and mortality of first primary invasive breast cancer stratified by age, stage and receptor subtype in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2017.

Authors:  Daniël J van der Meer; Iris Kramer; Marissa C van Maaren; Paul J van Diest; Sabine C Linn; John H Maduro; Luc J A Strobbe; Sabine Siesling; Marjanka K Schmidt; Adri C Voogd
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 7.396

6.  ASO Author Reflections: The Changing Role of Gene Expression Profiling in ER+/HER2- Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Julia E C van Steenhoven; T van Dalen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 5.344

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.