Steven J Katz1,2, Timothy P Hofer1,3, Yun Li4, Allison W Kurian5, Irina Bondarenko4, Jeremy M G Taylor4, Reshma Jagsi6, Kevin C Ward7, Ann S Hamilton8. 1. University of Michigan, Department of Internal Medicine. 2. University of Michigan, Department of Health Management and Policy. 3. Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Medical Center. 4. University of Michigan, Department of Biostatistics. 5. Stanford University, Departments of Medicine and Health Research and Policy. 6. University of Michigan, Department of Radiation Oncology. 7. Emory University, Department of Epidemiology. 8. University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify the influence of RS assay on changing chemotherapy plans in a general practice setting using causal inference methods. METHODS: We surveyed 3880 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in Los Angeles and Georgia in 2013-14. We used inverse propensity weighting and multiple imputations to derive complete information for each patient about treatment status with and without testing. RESULTS: A half of the 1545 women eligible for testing (ER+ or PR+, HER2-, and stage I-II) received RS. We estimate that 30% (95% confidence interval (CI) 10-49%) of patients would have changed their treatment selections after RS assay, with 10% (CI 0-20%) being encouraged to undergo chemotherapy and 20% (CI 10-30%) being discouraged from chemotherapy. The subgroups whose treatment selections would be changed the most by RS were patients with positive nodes (44%; CI 24-64%), larger tumor (43% for tumor size >2 cm; CI 23-62%), or younger age (41% for <50 years, CI 23-58%). The assay was associated with a net reduction in chemotherapy use by 10% (CI 4-16%). The reduction was much greater for women with positive nodes (31%; CI 21-41%), larger tumor (30% for tumor size >2 cm; CI 22-38%), or younger age (22% for <50 years; CI 9-35%). CONCLUSION: RS substantially changed chemotherapy treatment selections with the largest influence among patients with less favorable pre-test prognosis. Whether this is optimal awaits the results of clinical trials addressing the utility of RS testing in selected subgroups.
PURPOSE: To quantify the influence of RS assay on changing chemotherapy plans in a general practice setting using causal inference methods. METHODS: We surveyed 3880 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in Los Angeles and Georgia in 2013-14. We used inverse propensity weighting and multiple imputations to derive complete information for each patient about treatment status with and without testing. RESULTS: A half of the 1545 women eligible for testing (ER+ or PR+, HER2-, and stage I-II) received RS. We estimate that 30% (95% confidence interval (CI) 10-49%) of patients would have changed their treatment selections after RS assay, with 10% (CI 0-20%) being encouraged to undergo chemotherapy and 20% (CI 10-30%) being discouraged from chemotherapy. The subgroups whose treatment selections would be changed the most by RS were patients with positive nodes (44%; CI 24-64%), larger tumor (43% for tumor size >2 cm; CI 23-62%), or younger age (41% for <50 years, CI 23-58%). The assay was associated with a net reduction in chemotherapy use by 10% (CI 4-16%). The reduction was much greater for women with positive nodes (31%; CI 21-41%), larger tumor (30% for tumor size >2 cm; CI 22-38%), or younger age (22% for <50 years; CI 9-35%). CONCLUSION: RS substantially changed chemotherapy treatment selections with the largest influence among patients with less favorable pre-test prognosis. Whether this is optimal awaits the results of clinical trials addressing the utility of RS testing in selected subgroups.
Entities:
Keywords:
21-gene recurrence score assay; Breast cancer; Chemotherapy; Population studies
Authors: Tobias Kurth; Alexander M Walker; Robert J Glynn; K Arnold Chan; J Michael Gaziano; Klaus Berger; James M Robins Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2005-12-21 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Arnold L Potosky; Suzanne C O'Neill; Claudine Isaacs; Huei-Ting Tsai; Calvin Chao; Chunfu Liu; Bola F Ekezue; Nandini Selvam; Larry G Kessler; Yingjun Zhou; Marc D Schwartz Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Fatima Cardoso; Laura J van't Veer; Jan Bogaerts; Leen Slaets; Giuseppe Viale; Suzette Delaloge; Jean-Yves Pierga; Etienne Brain; Sylvain Causeret; Mauro DeLorenzi; Annuska M Glas; Vassilis Golfinopoulos; Theodora Goulioti; Susan Knox; Erika Matos; Bart Meulemans; Peter A Neijenhuis; Ulrike Nitz; Rodolfo Passalacqua; Peter Ravdin; Isabel T Rubio; Mahasti Saghatchian; Tineke J Smilde; Christos Sotiriou; Lisette Stork; Carolyn Straehle; Geraldine Thomas; Alastair M Thompson; Jacobus M van der Hoeven; Peter Vuylsteke; René Bernards; Konstantinos Tryfonidis; Emiel Rutgers; Martine Piccart Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mark N Levine; Jim A Julian; Philippe L Bedard; Andrea Eisen; Maureen E Trudeau; Brian Higgins; Louise Bordeleau; Kathleen I Pritchard Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Megan C Roberts; Morris Weinberger; Stacie B Dusetzina; Michaela A Dinan; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; Lisa A Carey; Melissa A Troester; Stephanie B Wheeler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael J Hassett; Samuel M Silver; Melissa E Hughes; Douglas W Blayney; Stephen B Edge; James G Herman; Clifford A Hudis; P Kelly Marcom; Jane E Pettinga; David Share; Richard Theriault; Yu-Ning Wong; Jonathan L Vandergrift; Joyce C Niland; Jane C Weeks Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-05-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Allison W Kurian; Irina Bondarenko; Reshma Jagsi; Christopher R Friese; M Chandler McLeod; Sarah T Hawley; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Timothy P Hofer; Steven J Katz Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Hongchao Pan; Richard Gray; Jeremy Braybrooke; Christina Davies; Carolyn Taylor; Paul McGale; Richard Peto; Kathleen I Pritchard; Jonas Bergh; Mitch Dowsett; Daniel F Hayes Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley; Irina Bondarenko; Reshma Jagsi; Kevin C Ward; Timothy P Hofer; Allison W Kurian Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-07-08 Impact factor: 4.624
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