Dataset Information

The clinical prognostic value of molecular intrinsic tumor subtypes in older breast cancer patients: A FOCUS study analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

It was recently proposed that the molecular breast tumor subtypes are differently distributed in the elderly breast cancer patients, and also lack prognostic value. Given the limited number of elderly patients in previous studies, the aim of this study was to determine the prognostic effect of the molecular intrinsic subtypes in a large older breast cancer population.

Material and method

Older breast cancer patients with invasive, non-metastatic breast cancer with tumor material available for immunohistochemical determination of Ki67, EGFR, CK5/6 and HER-2 were included. ER and PR expression was retrieved from the pathology report. Molecular subtypes were: Luminal A, Luminal B, ERBB2, Basal-like and Unclassified. Primary endpoint was Relapse Free Period (RFP), taking into account the competing risk of mortality, and adjusted for the most important patient, tumor and treatment characteristics. Secondary endpoint was Relative Survival (RS).

Results

Overall, 1362 patients were included. Patients with a Luminal A subtype had the lowest risk of recurrence (11% at 5 yrs). Patients with a Basal (24% at 5yrs) or ERBB2 (34% at 5yrs) molecular breast tumor subtype had the highest risk of recurrence. The ERBB2 subtype had the worst prognosis in terms of RFP (SHR 2.07, 95% CI 1.35-3.20; p = 0.001). The worst RS was again observed for the ERBB2 subtype (48% at 10 yrs). In multivariable analyses, the relative excess risk of death for all molecular subtypes was significantly worse compared to the Luminal A subtype.

Conclusion

Molecular intrinsic breast tumor subtypes have significant prognostic value in the elderly population, even after taking competing mortality into account.

SUBMITTER: Engels CC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5423141 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The clinical prognostic value of molecular intrinsic tumor subtypes in older breast cancer patients: A FOCUS study analysis.

Engels Charla C CC Kiderlen Mandy M Bastiaannet Esther E Mooyaart Antien L AL van Vlierberghe Ronald R Smit Vincent T H B M VT Kuppen Peter J K PJ van de Velde Cornelis J H CJ Liefers G J GJ

Molecular oncology 20151124 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>It was recently proposed that the molecular breast tumor subtypes are differently distributed in the elderly breast cancer patients, and also lack prognostic value. Given the limited number of elderly patients in previous studies, the aim of this study was to determine the prognostic effect of the molecular intrinsic subtypes in a large older breast cancer population.<h4>Material and method</h4>Older breast cancer patients with invasive, non-metastatic breast cancer with tum ...[more]

PMID: 26706834

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn hormone receptor-positive (HoR+) breast cancer (BC), gene expression analysis identifies luminal A (LumA), luminal B (LumB), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-enriched (HER2-E), basal-like (BL) intrinsic subtypes and a normal-like group. This classification has an established prognostic value in early-stage HoR+ BC. Here, we carried out a trial-level meta-analysis to determine the prognostic ability of subtypes in metastatic BC (MBC).Materials and methodsWe systematically reviewed all the available prospective phase II/III trials in HoR+ MBC where subtype was assessed. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS)/time to progression (TTP) of the LumA subtype compared to non-LumA. Secondary endpoints were PFS/TTP of each individual subtype, according to treatment, menopausal and HER2 status and overall survival (OS). The random-effect model was applied, and heterogeneity assessed through Cochran's Q and I2. Threshold for significance was set at P < 0.05. The study was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021255769).ResultsSeven studies were included (2536 patients). Non-LumA represented 55.2% and was associated with worse PFS/TTP than LumA [hazard ratio (HR) 1.77, P < 0.001, I2 = 61%], independently of clinical HER2 status [Psubgroup difference (Psub) = 0.16], systemic treatment (Psub = 0.96) and menopausal status (Psub = 0.12). Non-LumA tumors also showed worse OS (HR 2.00, P < 0.001, I2 = 65%), with significantly different outcomes for LumB (PFS/TTP HR 1.46; OS HR 1.41), HER2-E (PFS/TTP HR 2.39; OS HR 2.08) and BL (PFS/TTP HR 2.67; OS HR 3.26), separately (PFS/TTP Psub = 0.01; OS Psub = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses supported the main result. No publication bias was observed.ConclusionsIn HoR+ MBC, non-LumA disease is associated with poorer PFS/TTP and OS than LumA, independently of HER2, treatment and menopausal status. Future trials in HoR+ MBC should consider this clinically relevant biological classification.

Project description:IntroductionGene-expression signatures for prognosis have been reported in localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The aim of this study was to test the predictive power of two different signatures, ClearCode34, a 34-gene signature model [Eur Urol 2014;66:77-84], and an 8-gene signature model [Eur Urol 2015;67:17-20], in the setting of systemic therapy for metastatic disease.Materials and methodsMetastatic RCC (mRCC) patients from five institutions who were part of TCGA were identified and clinical data were retrieved. We trained and implemented each gene model as described by the original study. The latter was demonstrated by faithful regeneration of a figure and results from the original study. mRCC patients were dichotomized to good or poor prognostic risk groups using each gene model. Cox proportional hazard regression and concordance index (C-Index) analysis were used to investigate an association between each prognostic risk model and overall survival (OS) from first-line therapy.ResultsOverall, 54 patients were included in the final analysis. The primary endpoint was OS. Applying the ClearCode34 model, median survival for the low-risk-ccA (n = 17)-and the high-risk-ccB (n = 37)-subtypes were 27.6 and 22.3 months (hazard ratio (HR): 2.33; p = .039), respectively. ClearCode34 ccA/ccB and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) classifications appear to represent distinct risk criteria in mRCC, and we observed no significant overlap in classification (p > .05, chi-square test). On multivariable analyses and adjusting for IMDC groups, ccB remained independently associated with a worse OS (p = .044); the joint model of ccA/ccB and IMDC was significantly more accurate in predicting OS than a model with IMDC alone (p = .045, F-test). This was also observed in C-Index analysis; a model with both ccA and ccB subtypes had higher accuracy (C-Index 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51-0.75) and 95% CIs of the C-Index that did not include the null value of 0.5 in contrast to a model with IMDC alone (0.60, CI = 0.47-0.72). The 8-gene signature molecular subtype model was a weak but insignificant predictor of survival in this cohort (p = .13). A model that included both the 8-gene signature and IMDC (C-Index 0.62, CI = 0.49-0.76) was more prognostic than IMDC alone but did not reach significance, as the 95% CI included the null value of 0.5. These two genomic signatures share no genes in common and are enriched in different biological pathways. The ClearCode34 included genes ARNT and EPAS1 (also known as HIF2a), which are involved in regulation of gene expression by hypoxia-inducible factor.ConclusionThe ClearCode34 but not the 8-gene molecular model improved the prognostic predictive power of the IMDC model in this cohort of 54 patients with metastatic clear cell RCC. The Oncologist 2017;22:286-292 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The clinical and laboratory factors included in the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model provide prognostic information in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The present study shows that genomic signatures, originally validated in localized RCC, may add further complementary prognostic information in the metastatic setting. This study may provide new insights into the molecular basis of certain mRCC subgroups. The integration of clinical and molecular data has the potential to redefine mRCC classification, enhance the understanding of mRCC biology, and potentially predict response to treatment in the future.

Dataset Information

The clinical prognostic value of molecular intrinsic tumor subtypes in older breast cancer patients: A FOCUS study analysis.

Introduction

Material and method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The clinical prognostic value of molecular intrinsic tumor subtypes in older breast cancer patients: A FOCUS study analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets