Dataset Information

Evaluation of applying IHC4 as a prognostic model in the translational study of Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): PathIES.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES) was a randomised study that showed a survival benefit of switching adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2-3 years from tamoxifen to exemestane. This PathIES aimed to assess the role of immunohistochemical (IHC)4 score in determining the relative sensitivity to either tamoxifen or sequential treatment with tamoxifen and exemestane. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Primary tumour samples were available for 1274 patients (27% of IES population). Only patients for whom the IHC4 score could be calculated (based on oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER2 and Ki67) were included in this analysis (N = 430 patients). The clinical score (C) was based on age, grade, tumour size and nodal status. The association of clinicopathological parameters, IHC4(+C) scores and treatment effect with time to distant recurrence-free survival (TTDR) was assessed in univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses. A modified clinical score (PathIEscore) (N = 350) was also estimated. RESULTS:Our results confirm the prognostic importance of the original IHC4, alone and in conjunction with clinical scores, but no significant difference with treatment effects was observed. The combined IHC4 + Clinical PathIES score was prognostic for TTDR (P < 0.001) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 5.54 (95% CI 1.29-23.70) for a change from 1st quartile (Q1) to Q1-Q3 and HR of 15.54 (95% CI 3.70-65.24) for a change from Q1 to Q4. CONCLUSION:In the PathIES population, the IHC4 score is useful in predicting long-term relapse in patients who remain disease-free after 2-3 years. This is a first trial to suggest the extending use of IHC4+C score for prognostic indication for patients who have switched endocrine therapies at 2-3 years and who remain disease-free after 2-3 years.

SUBMITTER: Cheang MCU

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5847042 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of applying IHC4 as a prognostic model in the translational study of Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): PathIES.

Cheang M C U MCU Bliss J M JM Viale G G Speirs V V Palmieri C C Shaaban A A Lønning P E PE Morden J J Porta N N Jassem J J van De Velde C J CJ Rasmussen B B BB Verhoeven D D Bartlett J M S JMS Coombes R C RC

Breast cancer research and treatment 20171124 1

<h4>Background</h4>Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES) was a randomised study that showed a survival benefit of switching adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2-3 years from tamoxifen to exemestane. This PathIES aimed to assess the role of immunohistochemical (IHC)4 score in determining the relative sensitivity to either tamoxifen or sequential treatment with tamoxifen and exemestane.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Primary tumour samples were available for 1274 patients (27% of IES population). Only pati ...[more]

PMID: 29177605

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose The Intergroup Exemestane Study, an investigator-led study of 4,724 postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer (clinical trial information: ISRCTN11883920), has previously demonstrated that a switch from adjuvant endocrine therapy after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen to exemestane was associated with clinically relevant improvements in efficacy. Here, we report the final efficacy analyses of this cohort. Patients and Methods Patients who remained disease free after 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen were randomly assigned to continue tamoxifen or switch to exemestane to complete a total of 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Given the large number of non-breast cancer-related deaths now reported, breast cancer-free survival (BCFS), with censorship of intercurrent deaths, was the primary survival end point of interest. Analyses focus on patients with estrogen receptor-positive or unknown tumors (n = 4,599). Results At the time of the data snapshot, median follow-up was 120 months. In the population that was estrogen receptor positive or had unknown estrogen receptor status, 1,111 BCFS events were observed with 508 (22.1%) of 2,294 patients in the exemestane group and 603 (26.2%) of 2,305 patients in the tamoxifen group. The data corresponded to an absolute difference (between exemestane and tamoxifen) at 10 years of 4.0% (95% CI, 1.2% to 6.7%), and the hazard ratio (HR) of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.92) favored exemestane. This difference remained in multivariable analysis that was adjusted for nodal status, prior use of hormone replacement therapy, and prior chemotherapy (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.90; P < .001). A modest improvement in overall survival was seen with exemestane; the absolute difference (between exemestane and tamoxifen) at 10 years in the population that was estrogen receptor positive or had unknown estrogen receptor status was 2.1% (95% CI, -0.5% to 4.6%), and the HR was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78 to 1.01; P = .08). For the intention-to-treat population, the absolute difference was 1.6% (95% CI, -0.9% to 4.1%); the HR was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.80 to 1.03, P = .15). No statistically significant difference was observed in the proportion of patients who reported a fracture event in the post-treatment period. Conclusion The Intergroup Exemestane Study and contemporaneous studies have established that a strategy of switching to an aromatase inhibitor after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen can lead to sustained benefits in terms of reduction of disease recurrence and breast cancer mortality.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate whether an immunohistochemical prognostic model (IHC4 score) can predict the prognosis and the chemotherapy benefit in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC).Materials and methodsWe developed a method to calculate the modified IHC4 (mIHC4) scores based on routine pathological reports and compared them with the original IHC4 scores that were much more difficult to calculate. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to study the prognostic factors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The predictive value of mIHC4 score was also investigated.ResultsThe Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital data set included 315 patients with newly diagnosed ER+ MBC with a median follow-up of 25.6 months. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that higher mIHC4 scores in metastatic lesions, but not the ones in primary tumors, were significantly associated with worse PFS and OS. The prognostic value of mIHC4 scores for PFS was validated using an independent Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology- Breast Cancer (CSCO-BC) data set. More importantly, subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot analysis showed that first-line endocrine therapy achieved better PFS and OS than chemotherapy in low-risk patients with ER+/HER2- MBC, whereas first-line chemotherapy was associated with improved PFS and OS compared with endocrine therapy in high-risk ones. The predictive value of mIHC4 score for PFS in selecting first-line endocrine therapy versus chemotherapy was also confirmed in the CSCO-BC data set.ConclusionmIHC4 scores in metastatic lesions are prognostic for the PFS and OS in patients with ER+ MBC. Low or high mIHC4 score may indicate the survival benefit in choosing first-line endocrine therapy or chemotherapy in patients with ER+/HER2- MBC, respectively.Implications for practiceThe modified IHC4 (mIHC4) score is easy to implement and able to predict patients with advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer. In addition, with the help of the mIHC4 score, physicians might be able to recommend chemotherapy or endocrine therapy as the first-line treatment for patients with high and low risk as predicted by the mIHC4 score.

Project description:BackgroundInterprofessional education (IPE) interventions are not always successful in achieving learning outcomes. Team-Based Learning (TBL) would appear to be a suitable pedagogical method for IPE, as it focuses on team performance; however, little is known about interprofessional TBL as an instructional framework for patient safety. In this pilot-study, we aimed to (1) describe participants' reactions to TBL, (2) observe their achievement with respect to interprofessional education learning objectives, and (3) document their attitudinal shifts with regard to patient safety behaviours.MethodsWe developed and implemented a three-day course for pre-qualifying, non-medical healthcare students to give instruction on non-technical skills related to 'learning from errors'. The course consisted of three sequential modules: 'Recognizing Errors', 'Analysing Errors', and 'Reporting Errors'. The evaluation took place within a quasi-experimental pre-test-post-test study design. Participants completed self-assessments through valid and reliable instruments such as the Mennenga's TBL Student Assessment Instrument and the University of the West of England's Interprofessional Questionnaire. The mean scores of the individual readiness assurance tests were compared with the scores of the group readiness assurance test in order to explore if students learned from each other during group discussions. Data was analysed using descriptive (i.e. mean, standard deviation), parametric (i.e. paired t-test), and non-parametric (i.e. Wilcoxon signed-rank test) methods.ResultsThirty-nine students from five different bachelor's programs attended the course. The participants positively rated TBL as an instructional approach. All teams outperformed the mean score of their individual members during the readiness assurance process. We observed significant improvements in 'communication and teamwork' and 'interprofessional learning' but not in 'interprofessional interaction' and 'interprofessional relationships.' Findings on safety attitudes and behaviours were mixed.ConclusionTBL was well received by the students. Our first findings indicate that interprofessional TBL seems to be a promising pedagogical method to achieve patient safety learning objectives. It is crucial to develop relevant clinical cases that involve all professions. Further research with larger sample sizes (e.g. including medical students) and more rigorous study designs (e.g. pre-test post-test with a control group) is needed to confirm our preliminary findings.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of applying IHC4 as a prognostic model in the translational study of Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): PathIES.

Publications

Evaluation of applying IHC4 as a prognostic model in the translational study of Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): PathIES.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets