Literature DB >> 31019021

Evaluation of the Incorporation of Recurrence Score into the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Staging System in Patients with T1-2N0M0, Estrogen Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Receptor 2-Negative Invasive Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.

Shuning Ding1, Jiayi Wu1, Caijin Lin1, Lisa Andriani1, Chihwan Goh1, Weiguo Chen1, Yafen Li1, Kunwei Shen1, Li Zhu2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The current study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition staging system in patients with invasive breast cancer based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with T1-2N0M0, estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer from 2010 to 2014 were retrospectively recruited in this analysis. Patients were reassigned to different stages according to the anatomic staging system (AS), prognostic staging system (PS), and prognostic and genomic staging criteria downstaging patients with recurrence score (RS) lower than 11 (PGS_RS11). Cox models were conducted for multivariate analyses, and likelihood ratio (LR) χ2, Akaike information criterion (AIC), and Harrell's concordance index (C-index) were calculated for the comparison of different staging systems. Additionally, adjustments were made to generate prognostic and genomic staging criteria downstaging patients with RS lower than 18 (PGS_RS18) and RS lower than 25 (PGS_RS25).
RESULTS: PGS_RS11 was an independent predictor for breast cancer-specific survival, as were PS and AS. Adjusted for age and ethnicity, PGS_RS11 (AIC = 2,322.763, C-index = 0.7482, LR χ2 = 113.17) showed superiority in predicting survival outcomes and discriminating patients compared with AS (AIC = 2,369.132, C-index = 0.6986, LR χ2 = 60.80) but didn't outperform PS (AIC = 2,320.992, C-index = 0.7487, LR χ2 = 114.94). The predictive and discriminative ability of PGS_RS18 was the best (AIC = 2297.434, C-index = 0.7828, LR χ2 = 138.50) when compared with PS and PGS_RS11.
CONCLUSION: PGS_RS11 was superior to AS but comparable with PS in predicting prognosis. Further validations and refinements are needed for the better incorporation of RS into staging systems. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Staging systems are of critical importance in informing prognosis and guiding treatment. This study's objective was to evaluate the newly proposed staging system in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition staging manual, which combined biological and genomic information with the traditional TNM classification for the first time to determine tumor stages of breast cancer. The superiority of the prognostic and genomic staging system was validated in our cohort and possibly could encourage the utility of genomic assays in clinical practice for staging assessment and prognosis prediction. © AlphaMed Press 2019.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast malignancy; Multigene assay; Prognosis; Tumor staging

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31019021      PMCID: PMC6853098          DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0727

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncologist        ISSN: 1083-7159


  32 in total

1.  Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Soonmyung Paik; Gong Tang; Steven Shak; Chungyeul Kim; Joffre Baker; Wanseop Kim; Maureen Cronin; Frederick L Baehner; Drew Watson; John Bryant; Joseph P Costantino; Charles E Geyer; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-05-23       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 2.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Comparison of the 7th and proposed 8th editions of the AJCC/UICC TNM staging system for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent radical surgery.

Authors:  D Zhang; Y Zheng; Z Wang; Q Huang; X Cao; F Wang; S Liu
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 4.424

4.  A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Soonmyung Paik; Steven Shak; Gong Tang; Chungyeul Kim; Joffre Baker; Maureen Cronin; Frederick L Baehner; Michael G Walker; Drew Watson; Taesung Park; William Hiller; Edwin R Fisher; D Lawrence Wickerham; John Bryant; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Validation of the 8th AJCC prognostic staging system for breast cancer in a population-based setting.

Authors:  Omar Abdel-Rahman
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  70-Gene Signature as an Aid to Treatment Decisions in Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

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

7.  Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene.

Authors:  D J Slamon; G M Clark; S G Wong; W J Levin; A Ullrich; W L McGuire
Journal:  Science       Date:  1987-01-09       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Association between the 21-gene recurrence score assay and risk of locoregional recurrence in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20.

Authors:  Eleftherios P Mamounas; Gong Tang; Bernard Fisher; Soonmyung Paik; Steven Shak; Joseph P Costantino; Drew Watson; Charles E Geyer; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-01-11       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Validation Study of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Prognostic Stage Compared With the Anatomic Stage in Breast Cancer.

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

10.  Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update.

Authors:  Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; David G Hicks; Mitch Dowsett; Lisa M McShane; Kimberly H Allison; Donald C Allred; John M S Bartlett; Michael Bilous; Patrick Fitzgibbons; Wedad Hanna; Robert B Jenkins; Pamela B Mangu; Soonmyung Paik; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Patricia A Spears; Gail H Vance; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 44.544

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.