Kimberly J Van Zee1, Emily C Zabor2, Rosemarie Di Donato3, Bryan Harmon3, Jana Fox4, Monica Morrow5, Hiram S Cody5, Susan A Fineberg3. 1. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. vanzeek@mskcc.org. 2. Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA. 5. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) Nomogram integrating 10 clinicopathologic/treatment factors and a Refined DCIS Score (RDS) that incorporates a genomic assay and three clinicopathologic factors (Oncotype DX DCIS Score) are available to estimate DCIS 10-year local recurrence risk (LRR). This study compared these estimates. METHODS: Patients 50 years of age or older with DCIS size 2.5 cm or smaller and a genomic assay available were identified. An RDS within 1-2% of the range of Nomogram LRR estimates obtained by assuming use and non-use of endocrine therapy (Nomogram ± ET) was defined as concordant. Assuming a 10-year risk threshold of 10% for recommending radiation, Nomogram ± ET and RDS estimates were compared, and threshold concordance was determined. RESULTS: For 54 (92%) of 59 patients, the RDS and Nomogram ± ET LRR estimates were concordant. For the remaining 5 (8%) of the 59 patients, the RDS LRR estimates were lower than the Nomogram + ET estimates, with an absolute difference of 3-8%, and thus were discordant. For these five patients, the RDS estimates of 10-year LRR were lower than 10% (range 5-8%) and the Nomogram + ET estimates were 10% or higher (range 11-14%). These five patients with both discordant and threshold-discordant estimates all had close margins (≤ 2 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Among 92% of women 50 years of age or older with DCIS size 2.5 cm or smaller, free-of-charge online Nomogram 10-year LRR estimates were concordant with those obtained using the commercially available RDS (> $4600). Among the 8% with discordant risk estimates, the RDS appeared to underestimate the LRR and may lead to inappropriate omission of radiotherapy. Unless other data show a clinically significant advantage of the RDS (Oncotype DX DCIS Score), the study data suggest that for women 50 years of age or older with DCIS size 2.5 cm or smaller, its use is not warranted.
BACKGROUND: A ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) Nomogram integrating 10 clinicopathologic/treatment factors and a Refined DCIS Score (RDS) that incorporates a genomic assay and three clinicopathologic factors (Oncotype DX DCIS Score) are available to estimate DCIS 10-year local recurrence risk (LRR). This study compared these estimates. METHODS:Patients 50 years of age or older with DCIS size 2.5 cm or smaller and a genomic assay available were identified. An RDS within 1-2% of the range of Nomogram LRR estimates obtained by assuming use and non-use of endocrine therapy (Nomogram ± ET) was defined as concordant. Assuming a 10-year risk threshold of 10% for recommending radiation, Nomogram ± ET and RDS estimates were compared, and threshold concordance was determined. RESULTS: For 54 (92%) of 59 patients, the RDS and Nomogram ± ET LRR estimates were concordant. For the remaining 5 (8%) of the 59 patients, the RDS LRR estimates were lower than the Nomogram + ET estimates, with an absolute difference of 3-8%, and thus were discordant. For these five patients, the RDS estimates of 10-year LRR were lower than 10% (range 5-8%) and the Nomogram + ET estimates were 10% or higher (range 11-14%). These five patients with both discordant and threshold-discordant estimates all had close margins (≤ 2 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Among 92% of women 50 years of age or older with DCIS size 2.5 cm or smaller, free-of-charge online Nomogram 10-year LRR estimates were concordant with those obtained using the commercially available RDS (> $4600). Among the 8% with discordant risk estimates, the RDS appeared to underestimate the LRR and may lead to inappropriate omission of radiotherapy. Unless other data show a clinically significant advantage of the RDS (Oncotype DX DCIS Score), the study data suggest that for women 50 years of age or older with DCIS size 2.5 cm or smaller, its use is not warranted.
Authors: Renée S J M Schmitz; Erica A Wilthagen; Frederieke van Duijnhoven; Marja van Oirsouw; Ellen Verschuur; Thomas Lynch; Rinaa S Punglia; E Shelley Hwang; Jelle Wesseling; Marjanka K Schmidt; Eveline M A Bleiker; Ellen G Engelhardt Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-07-02 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Jacky D Luiten; Ernest J T Luiten; Maurice J C van der Sangen; Willem Vreuls; Lucien E M Duijm; Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen; Adri C Voogd Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-01-01 Impact factor: 4.872