Elizabeth A Mittendorf1, Mariana Chavez-MacGregor2,3, Jose Vila4, Min Yi4, Daphne Y Lichtensztajn5, Christina A Clarke5,6, Sharon H Giordano2,3, Kelly K Hunt4. 1. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. eamitten@mdanderson.org. 2. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 3. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 5. Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, CA, USA. 6. Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biologic factors guide treatment decisions and have a significant impact on prognosis for breast cancer patients. This study was undertaken to develop a staging system incorporating biologic factors in addition to standard anatomic factors in the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) pathologic stage (PS) to assess disease-specific survival (DSS). METHODS: Overall, 3327 patients treated with surgery as an initial intervention at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2007 to 2013 were identified. Multivariate analyses of factors, including PS, T stage (T), nodal stage (N), grade (G), estrogen receptor (ER) status (E) and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) status (H) were performed to identify associations with DSS. A score of 0-4 was assigned for each factor by considering the hazard ratio magnitude. Multiple staging system models were then constructed: PS, PS + G, PS + G + E, PS + G + E + H, T + N, T + N + G, T + N + G + E, and T + N + G + E + H. Model performance was quantified using Harrell's concordance index, and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was used to compare model fits. Comparable cases from California (n = 67,944) were used for validation. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 5.0 years (range 0.1-8.8) and 5-year DSS was 97.9% (95% confidence interval 97.3-98.4). Models incorporating grade, ER status, and HER2 status were most precise with identical C-index (0.81) and comparable AIC (994.9 for PS + G + E + H and 987.8 for T + N + G + E + H). Both models were externally validated. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm the importance of biologic factors in determining prognosis for breast cancer patients. We propose the Bioscore, which incorporates grade, ER and HER2 status with AJCC PS, to provide more refined stratification of breast cancer patients undergoing surgery as an initial intervention with respect to DSS.
BACKGROUND: Biologic factors guide treatment decisions and have a significant impact on prognosis for breast cancer patients. This study was undertaken to develop a staging system incorporating biologic factors in addition to standard anatomic factors in the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) pathologic stage (PS) to assess disease-specific survival (DSS). METHODS: Overall, 3327 patients treated with surgery as an initial intervention at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2007 to 2013 were identified. Multivariate analyses of factors, including PS, T stage (T), nodal stage (N), grade (G), estrogen receptor (ER) status (E) and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) status (H) were performed to identify associations with DSS. A score of 0-4 was assigned for each factor by considering the hazard ratio magnitude. Multiple staging system models were then constructed: PS, PS + G, PS + G + E, PS + G + E + H, T + N, T + N + G, T + N + G + E, and T + N + G + E + H. Model performance was quantified using Harrell's concordance index, and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was used to compare model fits. Comparable cases from California (n = 67,944) were used for validation. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 5.0 years (range 0.1-8.8) and 5-year DSS was 97.9% (95% confidence interval 97.3-98.4). Models incorporating grade, ER status, and HER2 status were most precise with identical C-index (0.81) and comparable AIC (994.9 for PS + G + E + H and 987.8 for T + N + G + E + H). Both models were externally validated. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm the importance of biologic factors in determining prognosis for breast cancer patients. We propose the Bioscore, which incorporates grade, ER and HER2 status with AJCC PS, to provide more refined stratification of breast cancer patients undergoing surgery as an initial intervention with respect to DSS.
Authors: A S Coates; E P Winer; A Goldhirsch; R D Gelber; M Gnant; M Piccart-Gebhart; B Thürlimann; H-J Senn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Min Yi; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Janice N Cormier; Thomas A Buchholz; Karl Bilimoria; Aysegul A Sahin; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Ana Maria Gonzalez-Angulo; Sheng Luo; Aman U Buzdar; Jaime R Crow; Henry M Kuerer; Kelly K Hunt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Martine J Piccart-Gebhart; Marion Procter; Brian Leyland-Jones; Aron Goldhirsch; Michael Untch; Ian Smith; Luca Gianni; Jose Baselga; Richard Bell; Christian Jackisch; David Cameron; Mitch Dowsett; Carlos H Barrios; Günther Steger; Chiun-Shen Huang; Michael Andersson; Moshe Inbar; Mikhail Lichinitser; István Láng; Ulrike Nitz; Hiroji Iwata; Christoph Thomssen; Caroline Lohrisch; Thomas M Suter; Josef Rüschoff; Tamás Suto; Victoria Greatorex; Carol Ward; Carolyn Straehle; Eleanor McFadden; M Stella Dolci; Richard D Gelber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-10-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Edward H Romond; Edith A Perez; John Bryant; Vera J Suman; Charles E Geyer; Nancy E Davidson; Elizabeth Tan-Chiu; Silvana Martino; Soonmyung Paik; Peter A Kaufman; Sandra M Swain; Thomas M Pisansky; Louis Fehrenbacher; Leila A Kutteh; Victor G Vogel; Daniel W Visscher; Greg Yothers; Robert B Jenkins; Ann M Brown; Shaker R Dakhil; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Wilma L Lingle; Pamela M Klein; James N Ingle; Norman Wolmark Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-10-20 Impact factor: 91.245
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
Authors: S Paik; R Hazan; E R Fisher; R E Sass; B Fisher; C Redmond; J Schlessinger; M E Lippman; C R King Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1990-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Olga Kantor; Harold J Burstein; Tari A King; Steven Shak; Christy A Russell; Armando E Giuliano; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Eric P Winer; Larissa A Korde; Joseph A Sparano; Elizabeth A Mittendorf Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-07-27 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: Anna Weiss; Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Daphne Y Lichtensztajn; Min Yi; Audree Tadros; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Sharon H Giordano; Kelly K Hunt; Elizabeth A Mittendorf Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Olga Kantor; Tari A King; Steven Shak; Christy A Russell; Armando E Giuliano; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Harold J Burstein; Eric P Winer; Tanujit Dey; Joseph A Sparano; Elizabeth A Mittendorf Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jennifer K Plichta; Yi Ren; Samantha M Thomas; Rachel A Greenup; Oluwadamilola M Fayanju; Laura H Rosenberger; Terry Hyslop; E Shelley Hwang Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 13.787
Authors: Yi Heng Seow; Ru Xin Wong; John Heng Chi Lim; Weixiang Lian; Yoon Sim Yap; Fuh Yong Wong Journal: J Breast Cancer Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 3.588