Strong impact of MammaPrint and BluePrint on treatment decisions in luminal early breast cancer: results of the WSG-PRIMe study.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Breast Neoplasms
/ classification
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Decision Making
Female
Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
/ drug effects
Humans
In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence
Middle Aged
Receptor, ErbB-2
/ genetics
Receptors, Estrogen
/ genetics
Receptors, Progesterone
/ genetics
Transcriptome
/ genetics
Treatment Outcome
BluePrint
Breast cancer
Decision impact
Diagnostic test
MammaPrint
Molecular profiling
Journal
Breast cancer research and treatment
ISSN: 1573-7217
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer Res Treat
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8111104
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Jun 2019
Historique:
received:
22
11
2018
accepted:
27
11
2018
pubmed:
24
2
2019
medline:
16
11
2019
entrez:
24
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The WSG-PRIMe Study prospectively evaluated the impact of the 70-gene signature MammaPrint® (MP) and the 80-gene molecular subtyping assay BluePrint® on clinical therapy decisions in luminal early breast cancer. 452 hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative patients were recruited (N0, N1). Physicians provided initial therapy recommendations based on clinicopathological factors. After prospective risk classification by MammaPrint/BluePrint was revealed, post-test treatment recommendations and actual treatment were recorded. Decisional Conflict and anxiety were measured by questionnaires. Post-test switch (in chemotherapy (CT) recommendation) occurred in 29.1% of cases. Overall, physician adherence to MP risk assessment was 92.3% for low-risk and 94.3% for high-risk MP scores. Adherence was remarkably high in "discordant" groups: 74.7% of physicians initially recommending CT switched to CT omission following low-risk MP scores; conversely, 88.9% of physicians initially recommending CT omission switched to CT recommendations following high-risk MP scores. Most patients (99.2%) recommended to forgo CT post-test and 21.3% of patients with post-test CT recommendations did not undergo CT; among MP low-risk patients with pre-test and post-test CT recommendations, 40% did not actually undergo CT. Luminal subtype assessment by BluePrint was discordant with IHC assessment in 34% of patients. Patients' State Anxiety scores improved significantly overall, particularly in MP low-risk patients. Trait Anxiety scores increased slightly in MP high risk and decreased slightly in MP low-risk patients. MammaPrint and BluePrint test results strongly impacted physicians' therapy decisions in luminal EBC with up to three involved lymph nodes. The high adherence to genetically determined risk assessment represents a key prerequisite for achieving a personalized cost-effective approach to disease management of early breast cancer.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30796651
doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-05075-x
pii: 10.1007/s10549-018-05075-x
pmc: PMC6533223
doi:
Substances chimiques
Receptors, Estrogen
0
Receptors, Progesterone
0
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
389-399Subventions
Organisme : Horizon 2020
ID : 672570
Investigateurs
E-M Grischke
(EM)
N Harbeck
(N)
C Schem
(C)
O Gluz
(O)
M Thill
(M)
S Hasmüller
(S)
A Köhler
(A)
B Otremba
(B)
F Griesinger
(F)
C Schindlbeck
(C)
T Reimer
(T)
J Krauter
(J)
O Tomé
(O)
K Friedrichs
(K)
U-S Albert
(US)
G Gebauer
(G)
S Ackermann
(S)
I Scheffen
(I)
G Kaltenecker
(G)
F Overkamp
(F)
I Schrader
(I)
J Potenberg
(J)
H-M Enzinger
(HM)
A Trojan
(A)
F Otto
(F)
R Pusch
(R)
Références
Nature. 2002 Jan 31;415(6871):530-6
pubmed: 11823860
N Engl J Med. 2002 Dec 19;347(25):1999-2009
pubmed: 12490681
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 Sep 6;98(17):1183-92
pubmed: 16954471
Nature. 2008 Apr 3;452(7187):564-70
pubmed: 18385730
Clin Cancer Res. 2008 May 15;14(10):2988-93
pubmed: 18483364
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009 Jul;116(2):295-302
pubmed: 18661261
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009 Oct;117(3):483-95
pubmed: 18819002
Ann Oncol. 2010 Apr;21(4):717-22
pubmed: 19825882
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jun;40(6):508-12
pubmed: 20110242
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 May;133(1):37-47
pubmed: 21814749
Int J Cancer. 2013 Aug 15;133(4):929-36
pubmed: 23371464
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013 Jun;139(3):759-67
pubmed: 23756626
Ann Oncol. 2013 Sep;24(9):2206-23
pubmed: 23917950
Breast. 2014 Aug;23(4):423-8
pubmed: 24685596
Br J Cancer. 2014 Aug 26;111(5):837-42
pubmed: 25003667
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Oct;21(10):3261-7
pubmed: 25099655
Med Oncol. 2014 Oct;31(10):163
pubmed: 25186065
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Oct;22(11):3418-32
pubmed: 26215189
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015 Nov;154(1):81-8
pubmed: 26424167
Breast J. 2016 Jul;22(4):442-6
pubmed: 27079770
N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375(8):717-29
pubmed: 27557300
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 12;4:CD001431
pubmed: 28402085
Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Sep;24(9):2539-2546
pubmed: 28447218
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Aug 20;35(24):2814-2819
pubmed: 28813638
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Jan;167(1):123-131
pubmed: 28929359
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jan 11;4(1):e173470
pubmed: 29075751
Med Decis Making. 1995 Jan-Mar;15(1):25-30
pubmed: 7898294