Mei-Yin C Polley1, Maura N Dickler2, Jason Sinnwell3, Kathleen Tenner3, Juan de la Haba4, Sibylle Loibl5, Matthew P Goetz4,6, Jonas Bergh7, John Roberston8, Fergus Couch9, Matthew J Ellis10, Miguel Martin11. 1. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. mcpolley@uchicago.edu. 2. Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 3. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 4. GEICAM, Madrid, Spain. 5. German Breast Group (GBG), Neu-Isenburg, Germany. 6. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 7. Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 8. University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 9. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 10. Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 11. Gregorio Marañón University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Endocrine therapy (ET) is an effective strategy to treat hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) but nearly all patients eventually progress. Our goal was to develop and validate a web-based clinical calculator for predicting disease outcomes in women with HR+ABC who are candidates for receiving first-line single-agent ET. METHODS: The meta-database comprises 891 patient-level data from the control arms of five contemporary clinical trials where patients received first-line single-agent ET (either aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant) for ABC. Risk models were constructed for predicting 24-months progression-free survival (PFS-24) and 24-months overall survival (OS-24). Final models were internally validated for calibration and discrimination using ten-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: Higher number of sites of metastases, measurable disease, younger age, lower body mass index, negative PR status, and prior endocrine therapy were associated with worse PFS. Final PFS and OS models were well-calibrated and associated with cross-validated time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) of 0.61 and 0.62, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed ABC calculator is internally valid and can accurately predict disease outcomes. It may be used to predict patient prognosis, aid planning of first-line treatment strategies, and facilitate risk stratification for future clinical trials in patients with HR+ABC. Future validation of the proposed models in independent patient cohorts is warranted.
PURPOSE: Endocrine therapy (ET) is an effective strategy to treat hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) but nearly all patients eventually progress. Our goal was to develop and validate a web-based clinical calculator for predicting disease outcomes in women with HR+ABC who are candidates for receiving first-line single-agent ET. METHODS: The meta-database comprises 891 patient-level data from the control arms of five contemporary clinical trials where patients received first-line single-agent ET (either aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant) for ABC. Risk models were constructed for predicting 24-months progression-free survival (PFS-24) and 24-months overall survival (OS-24). Final models were internally validated for calibration and discrimination using ten-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: Higher number of sites of metastases, measurable disease, younger age, lower body mass index, negative PR status, and prior endocrine therapy were associated with worse PFS. Final PFS and OS models were well-calibrated and associated with cross-validated time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) of 0.61 and 0.62, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed ABC calculator is internally valid and can accurately predict disease outcomes. It may be used to predict patient prognosis, aid planning of first-line treatment strategies, and facilitate risk stratification for future clinical trials in patients with HR+ABC. Future validation of the proposed models in independent patient cohorts is warranted.
Authors: Jonas Bergh; Per-Ebbe Jönsson; Elisabet Kerstin Lidbrink; Maureen Trudeau; Wolfgang Eiermann; Daniel Brattström; Justin P O Lindemann; Fredrik Wiklund; Roger Henriksson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-02-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; Ann A Lazar; Igor Bondarenko; August M Garin; Stephen Brincat; Louis Chow; Yan Sun; Zora Neskovic-Konstantinovic; Rodrigo C Guimaraes; Pierre Fumoleau; Arlene Chan; Soulef Hachemi; Andrew Strahs; Maria Cincotta; Anna Berkenblit; Mizue Krygowski; Lih Lisa Kang; Laurence Moore; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-12-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: John F R Robertson; Igor M Bondarenko; Ekaterina Trishkina; Mikhail Dvorkin; Lawrence Panasci; Alexey Manikhas; Yaroslav Shparyk; Servando Cardona-Huerta; Kwok-Leung Cheung; Manuel Jesus Philco-Salas; Manuel Ruiz-Borrego; Zhimin Shao; Shinzaburo Noguchi; Jacqui Rowbottom; Mary Stuart; Lynda M Grinsted; Mehdi Fazal; Matthew J Ellis Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Maura N Dickler; William T Barry; Constance T Cirrincione; Matthew J Ellis; Mary Ellen Moynahan; Federico Innocenti; Arti Hurria; Hope S Rugo; Diana E Lake; Olwen Hahn; Bryan P Schneider; Debasish Tripathy; Lisa A Carey; Eric P Winer; Clifford A Hudis Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Dorien J A Lobbezoo; Roel J W van Kampen; Adri C Voogd; M Wouter Dercksen; Franchette van den Berkmortel; Tineke J Smilde; Agnes J van de Wouw; Frank P J Peters; Johanna M G H van Riel; Natascha A J B Peters; Maaike de Boer; George F Borm; Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Richard S Finn; Miguel Martin; Hope S Rugo; Stephen Jones; Seock-Ah Im; Karen Gelmon; Nadia Harbeck; Oleg N Lipatov; Janice M Walshe; Stacy Moulder; Eric Gauthier; Dongrui R Lu; Sophia Randolph; Véronique Diéras; Dennis J Slamon Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rita S Mehta; William E Barlow; Kathy S Albain; Ted A Vandenberg; Shaker R Dakhil; Nagendra R Tirumali; Danika L Lew; Daniel F Hayes; Julie R Gralow; Robert B Livingston; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: F Cardoso; A Costa; E Senkus; M Aapro; F André; C H Barrios; J Bergh; G Bhattacharyya; L Biganzoli; M J Cardoso; L Carey; D Corneliussen-James; G Curigliano; V Dieras; N El Saghir; A Eniu; L Fallowfield; D Fenech; P Francis; K Gelmon; A Gennari; N Harbeck; C Hudis; B Kaufman; I Krop; M Mayer; H Meijer; S Mertz; S Ohno; O Pagani; E Papadopoulos; F Peccatori; F Penault-Llorca; M J Piccart; J Y Pierga; H Rugo; L Shockney; G Sledge; S Swain; C Thomssen; A Tutt; D Vorobiof; B Xu; L Norton; E Winer Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: L Wyld; E Gutteridge; S E Pinder; J J James; S Y Chan; K L Cheung; J F R Robertson; A J Evans Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2003-07-21 Impact factor: 7.640