Concordance between results of inexpensive statistical models and multigene signatures in patients with ER+/HER2- early breast cancer.
Journal
Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc
ISSN: 1530-0285
Titre abrégé: Mod Pathol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8806605
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
received:
05
11
2020
accepted:
06
01
2021
revised:
06
01
2021
pubmed:
10
2
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
9
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Multigene signatures (MGS) are used to guide adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) decisions in patients diagnosed with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive HER2-negative early breast cancer. We used results from three MGS (Oncotype DX® (ODX), MammaPrint® (MP) or Prosigna®) and assessed the concordance between high or low risk of recurrence and the predicted risk of recurrence based on statistical models. In addition, we looked at the impact of MGS results on final aCT administration during the multidisciplinary meeting (MDM). We retrospectively included 129 patients with ER-positive HER2-negative early breast cancer for which MGS testing was performed after MDM at University Hospitals Leuven between May 2013 and April 2019 in case there was doubt about aCT recommendation. Tumor tissue was analyzed either by ODX (N = 44), MP (N = 28), or Prosigna® (N = 57). Eight statistical models were computed: Magee equations (ME), Memorial Sloan Kettering simplified risk score (MSK-SRS), Breast Cancer Recurrence Score Estimator (BCRSE), OncotypeDXCalculator (ODXC), new Adjuvant! Online (nAOL), Mymammaprint.com (MyMP), PREDICT, and SiNK. Concordance, negative percent agreement, and positive percent agreement were calculated. Of 129 cases, 53% were MGS low and 47% MGS high risk. Concordances of 100.0% were observed between risk results obtained by ODX and ME. For MP, BCRSE demonstrated the best concordance, and for Prosigna® the average of ME. Concordances of <50.0% were observed between risk results obtained by ODX and nAOL, ODX and MyMP, ODX and SiNK, MP and MSK-SRS, MP and nAOL, MP and MyMP, MP and SiNK, and Prosigna® and ODXC. Integration of MGS results during MDM resulted in change of aCT recommendation in 47% of patients and a 15% relative and 9% absolute reduction. In conclusion, statistical models, especially ME and BCRSE, can be useful in selecting ER-positive HER2-negative early breast cancer patients who may need MGS testing resulting in enhanced cost-effectiveness and reduced delay in therapeutic decision-making.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33558657
doi: 10.1038/s41379-021-00743-8
pii: S0893-3952(22)00581-6
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Receptors, Estrogen
0
ERBB2 protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1297-1309Références
Cardoso F, van’t VeerLJ, Bogaerts J, Slaets L, Viale G, Delaloge S, et al. 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:717–29.
pubmed: 27557300
Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, Hayes DF, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:111–21.
pubmed: 29860917
pmcid: 6172658
Gnant M, Sestak I, Filipits M, Dowsett M, Balic M, Lopez-Knowles E, et al. Identifying clinically relevant prognostic subgroups of postmenopausal women with node-positive hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy: a combined analysis of ABCSG-8 and ATAC using the PAM50 risk of recurrence score and intrinsic subtype. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:1685–91.
pubmed: 25935792
Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, Leung S, Voduc D, Vickery T, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–7.
pubmed: 19204204
Filipits M, Nielsen TO, Rudas M, Greil R, Stoger H, Jakesz R, et al. The PAM50 risk-of-recurrence score predicts risk for late distant recurrence after endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:1298–305.
pubmed: 24520097
Wallden B, Storhoff J, Nielsen T, Dowidar N, Schaper C, Ferree S, et al. Development and verification of the PAM50-based Prosigna breast cancer gene signature assay. BMC Med Genom. 2015;8:54.
Goncalves R, Bose R. Using multigene tests to select treatment for early-stage breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2013;11:174–82.
pubmed: 23411384
Mittempergher L, Delahaye LJ, Witteveen A, Spangler JB, Hassenmahomed F, Mee S, et al. MammaPrint and BluePrint molecular diagnostics using targeted RNA next-generation sequencing technology. J Mol Diagn. 2019;21:808–23.
pubmed: 31173928
Slembrouck L, Darrigues L, Laurent C, Mittempergher L, Delahaye LJ, Vanden Bempt I, et al. Decentralization of next-generation RNA sequencing-based MammaPrint(R) and BluePrint(R) Kit at University Hospitals Leuven and Curie Institute Paris. Transl Oncol. 2019;12:1557–65.
pubmed: 31513983
Untch M, Thomssen C, Bauerfeind I, Braun M, Brucker SY, Felberbaum R, et al. Primary therapy of early breast cancer: evidence, controversies, consensus: spectrum of opinion of German specialists on the 16th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference (Vienna 2019). Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2019;79:591–604.
pubmed: 31217628
pmcid: 6570611
Krop I, Ismaila N, Andre F, Bast RC, Barlow W, Collyar DE, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2838–47.
pubmed: 28692382
Andre F, Ismaila N, Henry NL, Somerfield MR, Bast RC, Barlow W, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline update-integration of results from TAILORx. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1956–64.
pubmed: 31150316
Cardoso F, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rubio IT, et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1674.
pubmed: 31236598
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Breast Cancer (Version 6.2020). https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf . 2020. Accessed 15 Aug 2020.
San Miguel L, Vlayen J, De Laet C. De moleculaire profileringstesten en hun bijdrage aan de beslissing ott behandeling met adjuvante chemotherapie bij borstkanker—EEN Rapid Assessment—Synthese. KCE Reports 237As. Brussel: Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg (KCE); 2015.
Turner BM, Skinner KA, Tang P, Jackson MC, Soukiazian N, Shayne M, et al. Use of modified Magee equations and histologic criteria to predict the Oncotype DX recurrence score. Mod Pathol. 2015;28:921–31.
pubmed: 25932962
Allison KH, Kandalaft PL, Sitlani CM, Dintzis SM, Gown AM. Routine pathologic parameters can predict Oncotype DX recurrence scores in subsets of ER positive patients: who does not always need testing? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;131:413–24.
pubmed: 21369717
Baskota SU, Dabbs DJ, Clark BZ, Bhargava R. Prosigna® breast cancer assay: histopathologic correlation, development, and assessment of size, nodal status, Ki-67 (SiNK™) index for breast cancer prognosis. Mod Pathol. 2021;34:70–6.
pubmed: 32740650
Allison KH, Hammond MEH, Dowsett M, McKernin SE, Carey LA, Fitzgibbons PL, et al. Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:1346–66.
pubmed: 31928404
Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Allison KH, Harvey BE, Mangu PB, Bartlett JMS, et al. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:2105–22.
pubmed: 29846122
Harvey JM, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Allred DC. Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1474–81.
pubmed: 10334533
Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Ravdin PM, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, et al. Clinical and genomic risk to guide the use of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2395–405.
pubmed: 31157962
pmcid: 6709671
Klein ME, Dabbs DJ, Shuai Y, Brufsky AM, Jankowitz R, Puhalla SL, et al. Prediction of the Oncotype DX recurrence score: use of pathology-generated equations derived by linear regression analysis. Mod Pathol. 2013;26:658–64.
pubmed: 23503643
pmcid: 3647116
UPCM University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Estimating Oncotype DX Recurrence Score. http://path.upmc.edu/onlineTools/mageeequations.html . 2018. Accessed 30 Aug 2019.
Bhargava R, Clark BZ, Dabbs DJ. Breast cancers with magee equation score of less than 18, or 18–25 and Mitosis Score of 1, do not require oncotype DX testing: a value study. Am J Clin Pathol. 2019;151:316–23.
pubmed: 30395177
Eaton AA, Pesce CE, Murphy JO, Stempel MM, Patil SM, Brogi E, et al. Estimating the OncotypeDX score: validation of an inexpensive estimation tool. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;161:435–41.
pubmed: 27928699
Johns Hopkins University. Breast Cancer Recurrence Score Estimator. http://www.breastrecurrenceestimator.onc.jhmi.edu/ . 2016. Accessed 6 Sep 2019.
Kim HS, Umbricht CB, Illei PB, Cimino-Mathews A, Cho S, Chowdhury N, et al. Optimizing the use of gene expression profiling in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:4390–7.
pubmed: 27998227
University of Tennessee Medical Center. Updated breast cancer nomograms: prediction for a low-risk and a high-risk oncotype DX Recurrence Score 2019. https://utgsm.shinyapps.io/OncotypeDXCalculator/ . 2019. Accessed 6 Sep 2019.
Orucevic A, Bell JL, King M, McNabb AP, Heidel RE. Nomogram update based on TAILORx clinical trial results - Oncotype DX breast cancer recurrence score can be predicted using clinicopathologic data. Breast. 2019;46:116–25.
pubmed: 31146185
Adjuvant! Online. http://www.newadjuvant.com/ . 2018. Accessed 5 Jun 2018.
Ravdin PM, Siminoff LA, Davis GJ, Mercer MB, Hewlett J, Gerson N, et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:980–91.
pubmed: 11181660
Olivotto IA, Bajdik CD, Ravdin PM, Speers CH, Coldman AJ, Norris BD, et al. Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2716–25.
pubmed: 15837986
MyMammaprint. http://www.mymammaprint.com/ . 2016. Accessed 6 Sep 2019.
Public Health England and Cambridge University. PREDICT Tool Version 2.1 breast cancer. https://breast.predict.nhs.uk/about/technical/publications . 2017. Accessed 6 Sep 2019.
Candido Dos Reis FJ, Wishart GC, Dicks EM, Greenberg D, Rashbass J, Schmidt MK, et al. An updated PREDICT breast cancer prognostication and treatment benefit prediction model with independent validation. Breast Cancer Res. 2017;19:58.
pubmed: 28532503
pmcid: 5440946
Wishart GC, Bajdik CD, Azzato EM, Dicks E, Greenberg DC, Rashbass J, et al. A population-based validation of the prognostic model PREDICT for early breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37:411–7.
pubmed: 21371853
McCarty KS,Jr., Miller LS, Cox EB, Konrath J, McCarty KS,Sr. Estrogen receptor analyses. Correlation of biochemical and immunohistochemical methods using monoclonal antireceptor antibodies. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1985;109:716–21.
pubmed: 3893381
Shousha S. Oestrogen receptor status of breast carcinoma: Allred/H score conversion table. Histopathology. 2008;53:346–7.
pubmed: 18631198
Harbeck N, Penault-Llorca F, Cortes J, Gnant M, Houssami N, Poortmans P, et al. Breast cancer. Nat Rev Dis Prim. 2019;5:66.
pubmed: 31548545
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thurlimann B, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer. Ann Oncol. 2013;24:2206–23.
pubmed: 23917950
pmcid: 3755334
Van Asten K, Slembrouck L, Olbrecht S, Jongen L, Brouckaert O, Wildiers H, et al. Prognostic value of the progesterone receptor by subtype in patients with estrogen receptor-positive, HER-2 negative breast cancer. Oncologist. 2019;24:165–71.
pubmed: 30171067
Chaudhary LN, Jawa Z, Szabo A, Visotcky A, Chitambar CR. Relevance of progesterone receptor immunohistochemical staining to Oncotype DX recurrence score. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2016;9:48–54.
pubmed: 26808222
Clark BZ, Dabbs DJ, Cooper KL, Bhargava R. Impact of progesterone receptor semiquantitative immunohistochemical result on Oncotype DX recurrence score: a quality assurance study of 1074 cases. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2013;21:287–91.
pubmed: 23060300
Thibodeau S, Voutsadakis IA. Prediction of Oncotype Dx recurrence score using clinical parameters: a comparison of available tools and a simple predictor based on grade and progesterone receptor. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2019;12:89–96.
pubmed: 30796885
Huang JL, Kizy S, Marmor S, Altman A, Blaes A, Beckwith H, et al. Tumor grade and progesterone receptor status predict 21-gene recurrence score in early stage invasive breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;172:671–7.
pubmed: 30196425
Purdie CA, Quinlan P, Jordan LB, Ashfield A, Ogston S, Dewar JA, et al. Progesterone receptor expression is an independent prognostic variable in early breast cancer: a population-based study. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:565–72.
pubmed: 24300977
Brouckaert O, Van Calster B, Paridaens R, Wildiers H, Van Limbergen E, Weltens C. Abstract P6-07-19: prognostic relevance of PR and detection mode in Luminal Her-2 negative breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2012;72 (Suppl 24):1–1.
Bardou VJ, Arpino G, Elledge RM, Osborne CK, Clark GM. Progesterone receptor status significantly improves outcome prediction over estrogen receptor status alone for adjuvant endocrine therapy in two large breast cancer databases. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1973–9.
pubmed: 12743151
Creighton CJ, Kent Osborne C, van de Vijver MJ, Foekens JA, Klijn JG, Horlings HM, et al. Molecular profiles of progesterone receptor loss in human breast tumors. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;114:287–99.
pubmed: 18425577
Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Lee AH, Elston CW, Grainge MJ, Hodi Z, et al. Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3153–8.
pubmed: 18490649
Abdel-Fatah TM, Powe DG, Ball G, Lopez-Garcia MA, Habashy HO, Green AR, et al. Proposal for a modified grading system based on mitotic index and Bcl2 provides objective determination of clinical outcome for patients with breast cancer. J Pathol. 2010;222:388–99.
pubmed: 20922713
Giuliano AE, Connolly JL, Edge SB, Mittendorf EA, Rugo HS, Solin LJ, et al. Breast cancer-major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:290–303.
pubmed: 28294295
Isaacs C, Stearns V, Hayes DF. New prognostic factors for breast cancer recurrence. Semin Oncol. 2001;28:53–67.
pubmed: 11254867
Hajjaji N, Robin YM, Bonneterre J. Should a multigene signature be used in all luminal early breast cancers. Front Oncol. 2019;9:454.
pubmed: 31214499
Bhutiani N, Egger ME, Ajkay N, Scoggins CR, Martin RC 2nd, McMasters KM. Multigene signature panels and breast cancer therapy: patterns of use and impact on clinical decision making. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;226:406–12.e1.
pubmed: 29366844
Hequet D, Callens C, Gentien D, Albaud B, Mouret-Reynier MA, Dubot C, et al. Prospective, multicenter French study evaluating the clinical impact of the Breast Cancer Intrinsic Subtype-Prosigna® Test in the management of early-stage breast cancers. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0185753.
pubmed: 29045452
Bhargava R, Clark BZ, Carter GJ, Brufsky AM, Dabbs DJ. The healthcare value of the Magee Decision Algorithm™: use of Magee Equations™ and mitosis score to safely forgo molecular testing in breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2020;33:1563–70.
pubmed: 32203092
pmcid: 7384988
Robertson SJ, Ibrahim MFK, Stober C, Hilton J, Kos Z, Mazzarello S, et al. Does integration of Magee equations into routine clinical practice affect whether oncologists order the Oncotype DX test? A prospective randomized trial. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019;25:196–204.
pubmed: 30672056
de Lima MAG, Clemons M, Van Katwyk S, Stober C, Robertson SJ, Vandermeer L, et al. Cost analysis of using Magee scores as a surrogate of Oncotype DX for adjuvant treatment decisions in women with early breast cancer. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020;26:889–92.
pubmed: 31287198
Markopoulos C, Hyams DM, Gomez HL, Harries M, Nakamura S, Traina T, et al. Multigene assays in early breast cancer: Insights from recent phase 3 studies. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020;46:656–66.
pubmed: 31706719