John R Bergquist1,2, Brittany L Murphy1,2, Curtis B Storlie2,3, Elizabeth B Habermann1,2, Judy C Boughey4. 1. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery - Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA. Boughey.Judy@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improved staging systems that better predict survival for breast cancer patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) by accounting for clinical pathological stage plus estrogen receptor (ER) and grade (CPS+EG) and ERBB2 status (Neo-Bioscore) have been proposed. We sought to evaluate the generalizability and performance of these staging systems in a national cohort. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2006-2012) was reviewed for patients with breast cancer who received NAC and survived ≥90 days after surgery. Four systems were evaluated: clinical/pathologic American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition, CPS+EG, and Neo-Bioscore. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models quantified overall survival (OS). Systems were compared using area under the curve (AUC) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). RESULTS: Overall, 43,320 patients (5-year OS 76.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 75.4-76.5%) were included, 12,002 of whom had evaluable Neo-Bioscore. AUC at 5 years for CPS+EG (0.720, 95% CI 0.714-0.726) and Neo-Bioscore (0.729, 95% CI 0.716-0.742) were improved relative to AJCC clinical (0.650, 95% CI 0.643-0.656) and pathologic (0.683, 95% CI 0.676-0.689) staging. Both CPS+EG (IDI 7.2, 95% CI 6.6-7.7%) and Neo-Bioscore (IDI 9.8, 95% CI 8.0-11.6%) demonstrated superior discrimination when compared with AJCC clinical staging at 5 years. Comparison of CPS+EG with Neo-Bioscore yielded an IDI of 2.6% (95% CI 0.9-4.5%), indicating that Neo-Bioscore is the best staging system. CONCLUSIONS: In a heterogenous national cohort of breast cancer patients treated with NAC and surgery, the incorporation of chemotherapy response, tumor grade, ER status, and ERBB2 status into the staging system substantially improved on the AJCC TNM staging system in discrimination of OS. Neo-Bioscore provided the best staging discrimination.
BACKGROUND: Improved staging systems that better predict survival for breast cancerpatients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) by accounting for clinical pathological stage plus estrogen receptor (ER) and grade (CPS+EG) and ERBB2 status (Neo-Bioscore) have been proposed. We sought to evaluate the generalizability and performance of these staging systems in a national cohort. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2006-2012) was reviewed for patients with breast cancer who received NAC and survived ≥90 days after surgery. Four systems were evaluated: clinical/pathologic American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition, CPS+EG, and Neo-Bioscore. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models quantified overall survival (OS). Systems were compared using area under the curve (AUC) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). RESULTS: Overall, 43,320 patients (5-year OS 76.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 75.4-76.5%) were included, 12,002 of whom had evaluable Neo-Bioscore. AUC at 5 years for CPS+EG (0.720, 95% CI 0.714-0.726) and Neo-Bioscore (0.729, 95% CI 0.716-0.742) were improved relative to AJCC clinical (0.650, 95% CI 0.643-0.656) and pathologic (0.683, 95% CI 0.676-0.689) staging. Both CPS+EG (IDI 7.2, 95% CI 6.6-7.7%) and Neo-Bioscore (IDI 9.8, 95% CI 8.0-11.6%) demonstrated superior discrimination when compared with AJCC clinical staging at 5 years. Comparison of CPS+EG with Neo-Bioscore yielded an IDI of 2.6% (95% CI 0.9-4.5%), indicating that Neo-Bioscore is the best staging system. CONCLUSIONS: In a heterogenous national cohort of breast cancerpatients treated with NAC and surgery, the incorporation of chemotherapy response, tumor grade, ER status, and ERBB2 status into the staging system substantially improved on the AJCC TNM staging system in discrimination of OS. Neo-Bioscore provided the best staging discrimination.
Authors: Kathryn P Lowry; H Amarens Geuzinge; Natasha K Stout; Oguzhan Alagoz; John Hampton; Karla Kerlikowske; Harry J de Koning; Diana L Miglioretti; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Clyde Schechter; Brian L Sprague; Anna N A Tosteson; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Donald Weaver; Martin J Yaffe; Jennifer M Yeh; Fergus J Couch; Chunling Hu; Peter Kraft; Eric C Polley; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Allison W Kurian; Mark E Robson Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 33.006
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: Elmar Stickeler; Bahriye Aktas; Annika Behrens; Erik Belleville; Nina Ditsch; Peter A Fasching; Tanja N Fehm; Andreas D Hartkopf; Christian Jackisch; Wolfgang Janni; Cornelia Kolberg-Liedtke; Hans-Christian Kolberg; Diana Lüftner; Michael P Lux; Volkmar Müller; Andreas Schneeweiss; Florian Schütz; Carla E Schulmeyer; Hans Tesch; Christoph Thomssen; Christoph Uleer; Michael Untch; Manfred Welslau; Achim Wöckel; Lena A Wurmthaler; Rachel Würstlein; Marc Thill Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Lynn Symonds; Isaac Jenkins; Hannah M Linden; Brenda Kurland; Julie R Gralow; Vijayakrishna V K Gadi; Georgiana K Ellis; Qian Wu; Eve Rodler; Pavani Chalasani; Xiaoyu Chai; Jinny Riedel; Alison Stopeck; Ursa Brown-Glaberman; Jennifer M Specht Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: John R Bergquist; Cornelius A Thiels; Christopher R Shubert; Tommy Ivanics; Elizabeth B Habermann; Santhi S Vege; Travis E Grotz; Sean P Cleary; Rory L Smoot; Michael L Kendrick; David M Nagorney; Mark J Truty Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 4.452