Development of the predictive model for I stage breast cancer
https://doi.org/10.17650/1994-4098-2021-17-2-14-22
Abstract
Objective: development of a predictive model based on binary regression to determine the likelihood of progression of I stage breast cancer.
Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of data of 385 patients with T1N0M0 stage breast cancer was performed. The minimum follow-up period was 120 months and the maximum made 256 months, with an average follow-up of 191 ± 36 months (16 ± 3 years). Using a forward stepwise selection (binary regression), the most important prognostic factors were selected, on the basis of which the predictive model “Risk Assessment Algorithm for Recurrence of Breast Carcinoma” was constructed.
Results. During the study period, recurrence of stage I breast cancer was reported in 67 patients, representing 17.4 % of the total cohort. Five prognostic factors were selected by binary regression: grade, histological type, estrogen receptor expression, HER2 / neu overexpression and Ki-67 amplification. Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards method demonstrated the influence of each of the selected factors on disease-free survival. Comparative analysis with other existing models showed that our prognostic model is inferior to Adjuvant! Online in terms of sensitivity (85 % ver- sus 95 %). However, it is superior in specificity (58 % versus 38 %), PPV (69 % versus 63 %) and AUC (84 % versus 70 %).
Conclusions. In I stage breast cancer, factors such as grade, histological type, estrogen receptor expression, HER2 / neu overexpression and Ki-67 amplification are the most significant predictive factors influencing recurrence rates. The algorithm for assessing the risk of recurrence of stage I breast cancer can predict the risk of tumour progression with a sensitivity of 84 % and a specificity of 58 % (p <0.05).
About the Authors
A. Kh. Ismagilov
Kazan State Medical Academy – branch of Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education of Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education of Ministry of Healthcare Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
29 Sibirskiy trakt, Kazan 420029, Russia
A. S. Vanesyan
Clinic «Creu Blanca»
Spain
Spain
71 Josep Vicens Foix St., Barcelona 08034, Spain
D. R. Khuzina
Tatarstan Regional Clinical Cancer Center
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
29 Sibirskiy trakt, Kazan 420029, Russia
References
1. Nielsen T.O., Hsu F.D., Jensen K. et al. Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10(16):5367–74. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-0220.
2. Cheang M.C.U., Voduc D., Bajdik C. et al. Basal-like breast cancer defined by five biomarkers has superior prognostic value than triple-negative phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14(5):1368–76. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-1658.
3. Coates A.S., Winer E.P., Goldhirsch A. et al. Tailoring therapies-improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015. Ann Oncol 2015;26(8): 1533–46. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdv221.
4. Ravdin P.M., Siminoff L.A., Davis G.J. et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19(4):980–91. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.4.980.
5. Killelea B., Gallagher E., Feldman S. et al. The effect of modifiable risk factors on breast cancer aggressiveness among black and white women. Am J Surgery 2019;218(4):689–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.07.012.
6. McCartney A., Vignoli A., Biganzoli L. et al. Metabolomics in breast cancer: A decade in review. Cancer Treat Rev 2018;67:88–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.04.012.
7. Cardoso F., Spence D., Mertz S. et al. Global analysis of advanced/metastatic breast cancer: decade report (2005–2015). Breast 2018;39:131–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.03.002.
8. Vanesyan A.S. The investigation of the influence of the breast reconstruction on the quality of life of patients with centralmedial breast cancer. Kreativnaya khirurgiya i onkologiya = Creative Surgery and Oncology 2011;(4):42–7. (In Russ.).
9. Procter M., Robertson C. Imputing missing quality of life data as covariate in survival analysis of the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trials VI and VII. Commun Stat Simul Comput 2019;48(2):580–90. DOI: 10.1080/03610918.2017.1390123.
10. Gradishar W., Anderson B. Breast cancer, version 4.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2018;16(3):310–20. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2018.0012.
11. Turner B.M., Gimenez-Sanders M.A., Soukiazian A. et al. Risk stratification of ER-positive breast cancer patients: A multi-institutional validation and outcome study of the Rochester Modified Magee algorithm (RoMMa) and prediction of an Oncotype DX® recurrence score <26. Cancer Med 2019;8(9):4176–88.
12. Xu Y., Kong S., Cheung W.Y. et al. Development and validation of case-finding algorithms for recurrence of breast cancer using routinely collected administrative data. BMC Cancer 2019;19(1):1–10. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5432-8.
13. Chehade H., Wazir U., Mokbel K. Do online prognostication tools represent a valid alternative to genomic profiling in the context of adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer? A systematic review of the literature. Am J Surgery 2018;215(1):171–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.05.006.
14. Phung T. Prognostic models for breast cancer: A systematic review and validation using New Zealand data. BMC Cancer 2019;19(1):230. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5442-6.
15. Kim W., Kim K.S., Lee J.E. et al. Development of novel breast cancer recurrence prediction model using support vector machine. J Breast Cancer 2012;15(2):230–8. DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2012.15.2.230.
Review
For citations:
Ismagilov A.Kh., Vanesyan A.S., Khuzina D.R. Development of the predictive model for I stage breast cancer. Tumors of female reproductive system. 2021;17(2):14‑22. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17650/1994-4098-2021-17-2-14-22
Views:
591
Email this article 