Literature DB >> 32066539

Predicting acute ovarian failure in female survivors of childhood cancer: a cohort study in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) and the St Jude Lifetime Cohort (SJLIFE).

Rebecca A Clark1, Sogol Mostoufi-Moab2, Yutaka Yasui3, Ngoc Khanh Vu1, Charles A Sklar4, Tarek Motan5, Russell J Brooke3, Todd M Gibson3, Kevin C Oeffinger6, Rebecca M Howell7, Susan A Smith7, Zhe Lu1, Leslie L Robison3, Wassim Chemaitilly3, Melissa M Hudson3, Gregory T Armstrong3, Paul C Nathan8, Yan Yuan9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment can cause gonadal impairment. Acute ovarian failure is defined as the permanent loss of ovarian function within 5 years of cancer diagnosis. We aimed to develop and validate risk prediction tools to provide accurate clinical guidance for paediatric patients with cancer.
METHODS: In this cohort study, prediction models of acute ovarian failure risk were developed using eligible female US and Canadian participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) cohort and validated in the St Jude Lifetime Cohort (SJLIFE) Study. 5-year survivors from the CCSS cohort were included if they were at least 18 years old at their most recent follow-up and had complete treatment exposure and adequate menstrual history (including age at menarche, current menstrual status, age at last menstruation, and menopausal aetiology) information available. Participants in the SJLIFE cohort were at least 10-year survivors. Participants were excluded from the prediction analysis if they had an ovarian hormone deficiency, had missing exposure information, or had indeterminate ovarian status. The outcome of acute ovarian failure was defined as permanent loss of ovarian function within 5 years of cancer diagnosis or no menarche after cancer treatment by the age of 18 years. Logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machines were used as candidate methods to develop the risk prediction models in the CCSS cohort. Prediction performance was evaluated internally (in the CCSS cohort) and externally (in the SJLIFE cohort) using the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the precision-recall curve (average precision [AP; average positive predictive value]).
FINDINGS: Data from the CCSS cohort were collected for participants followed up between Nov 3, 1992, and Nov 25, 2016, and from the SJLIFE cohort for participants followed up between Oct 17, 2007, and April 16, 2012. Of 11 336 female CCSS participants, 5886 (51·9%) met all inclusion criteria for analysis. 1644 participants were identified from the SJLIFE cohort, of whom 875 (53·2%) were eligible for analysis. 353 (6·0%) of analysed CCSS participants and 50 (5·7%) of analysed SJLIFE participants had acute ovarian failure. The overall median follow-up for the CCSS cohort was 23·9 years (IQR 20·4-27·9), and for SJLIFE it was 23·9 years (19·0-30·0). The three candidate methods (logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machines) yielded similar results, and a prescribed dose model with abdominal and pelvic radiation doses and an ovarian dose model with ovarian radiation dosimetry using logistic regression were selected. Common predictors in both models were history of haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, cumulative alkylating drug dose, and an interaction between age at cancer diagnosis and haematopoietic stem-cell transplant. External validation of the model in the SJLIFE cohort produced an estimated AUC of 0·94 (95% CI 0·90-0·98) and AP of 0·68 (95% CI 0·53-0·81) for the ovarian dose model, and AUC of 0·96 (0·94-0·97) and AP of 0·46 (0·34-0·61) for the prescribed dose model. Based on these models, an online risk calculator has been developed for clinical use.
INTERPRETATION: Both acute ovarian failure risk prediction models performed well. The ovarian dose model is preferred if ovarian radiation dosimetry is available. The models, along with the online risk calculator, could help clinical discussions regarding the need for fertility preservation interventions in girls and young women newly diagnosed with cancer. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Women and Children's Health Research Institute, National Cancer Institute, and American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32066539      PMCID: PMC7060129          DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30818-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  27 in total

1.  Impact of a premature menopause on cognitive function in later life.

Authors:  J Ryan; J Scali; I Carrière; H Amieva; O Rouaud; C Berr; K Ritchie; M-L Ancelin
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 6.531

2.  A threshold-free summary index of prediction accuracy for censored time to event data.

Authors:  Yan Yuan; Qian M Zhou; Bingying Li; Hengrui Cai; Eric J Chow; Gregory T Armstrong
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-02-08       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  The silent grief: psychosocial aspects of premature ovarian failure.

Authors:  D Singer; E Mann; M S Hunter; J Pitkin; N Panay
Journal:  Climacteric       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.005

4.  Premature Ovarian Insufficiency in Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Report From the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort.

Authors:  Wassim Chemaitilly; Zhenghong Li; Matthew J Krasin; Russell J Brooke; Carmen L Wilson; Daniel M Green; James L Klosky; Nicole Barnes; Karen L Clark; Jonathan B Farr; Israel Fernandez-Pineda; Michael W Bishop; Monika Metzger; Ching-Hon Pui; Sue C Kaste; Kirsten K Ness; Deo Kumar Srivastava; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Yutaka Yasui; Charles A Sklar
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 5.958

5.  Adaptations to a Generalized Radiation Dose Reconstruction Methodology for Use in Epidemiologic Studies: An Update from the MD Anderson Late Effect Group.

Authors:  Rebecca M Howell; Susan A Smith; Rita E Weathers; Stephen F Kry; Marilyn Stovall
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 6.  The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study: a National Cancer Institute-supported resource for outcome and intervention research.

Authors:  Leslie L Robison; Gregory T Armstrong; John D Boice; Eric J Chow; Stella M Davies; Sarah S Donaldson; Daniel M Green; Sue Hammond; Anna T Meadows; Ann C Mertens; John J Mulvihill; Paul C Nathan; Joseph P Neglia; Roger J Packer; Preetha Rajaraman; Charles A Sklar; Marilyn Stovall; Louise C Strong; Yutaka Yasui; Lonnie K Zeltzer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04-13       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Nonsurgical premature menopause and reproductive implications in survivors of childhood cancer: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

Authors:  Jennifer M Levine; John A Whitton; Jill P Ginsberg; Daniel M Green; Wendy M Leisenring; Marilyn Stovall; Leslie L Robison; Gregory T Armstrong; Charles A Sklar
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Clinical ascertainment of health outcomes among adults treated for childhood cancer.

Authors:  Melissa M Hudson; Kirsten K Ness; James G Gurney; Daniel A Mulrooney; Wassim Chemaitilly; Kevin R Krull; Daniel M Green; Gregory T Armstrong; Kerri A Nottage; Kendra E Jones; Charles A Sklar; Deo Kumar Srivastava; Leslie L Robison
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Endocrine Abnormalities in Aging Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

Authors:  Sogol Mostoufi-Moab; Kristy Seidel; Wendy M Leisenring; Gregory T Armstrong; Kevin C Oeffinger; Marilyn Stovall; Lillian R Meacham; Daniel M Green; Rita Weathers; Jill P Ginsberg; Leslie L Robison; Charles A Sklar
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Threshold-free measures for assessing the performance of medical screening tests.

Authors:  Yan Yuan; Wanhua Su; Mu Zhu
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2015-04-20
View more
  4 in total

1.  Chemotherapy-based gonadotoxicity risk evaluation as a predictor of reproductive outcomes in post-pubertal patients following ovarian tissue cryopreservation.

Authors:  Gilad Karavani; Amihai Rottenstreich; Natali Schachter-Safrai; Adiel Cohen; Michael Weintraub; Tal Imbar; Ariel Revel
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 2.809

2.  Construction and external validation of a 5-gene random forest model to diagnose non-obstructive azoospermia based on the single-cell RNA sequencing of testicular tissue.

Authors:  Ranran Zhou; Xianyuan Lv; Tianle Chen; Qi Chen; Hu Tian; Cheng Yang; Wenbin Guo; Cundong Liu
Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 5.682

3.  Non-myeloablative conditioning is sufficient to achieve complete donor myeloid chimerism following matched sibling donor bone marrow transplant for myeloproliferative leukemia virus oncogene (MPL) mutation-driven congenital amegakaryocytic thrombocytopenia: Case report.

Authors:  Joseph Hai Oved; Yash B Shah; Kimberly Venella; Michele E Paessler; Timothy S Olson
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 3.569

4.  A relationship between the incremental values of area under the ROC curve and of area under the precision-recall curve.

Authors:  Qian M Zhou; Lu Zhe; Russell J Brooke; Melissa M Hudson; Yan Yuan
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2021-07-14
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.