A new clinical-genomic model to predict 10-year recurrence risk in primary operable breast cancer patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Huang TT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7078190 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A new clinical-genomic model to predict 10-year recurrence risk in primary operable breast cancer patients.
Huang Tzu-Ting TT Lei Lei L Chen Ching-Hsuan Andre CA Lu Tzu-Pin TP Jen Chung-Wen CW Cheng Skye Hung-Chun SH
Scientific reports 20200317 1
This study aimed to validate the long-term prognostic value of a new clinical-genomic model, Distant Genetic Model-Clinical Variable Model 6 (DGM-CM6), developed in Asia as a prognostic panel for all subtypes of breast cancer. We included 752 operable stage I-III breast cancer patients representing all subtypes treated from 2005 to 2014 as the validation cohort. The median follow-up was 95.8 months. The low- and high-risk patients classified by DGM-CM6 (RI-DR) had significant differences in 10-y ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:To investigate the prognostic value of DGM-CM6 (Distant Genetic Model-Clinical variable Model 6) for endocrine-responsive breast cancer (ERBC) patients, we analyzed 752 operable breast cancer patients treated in a Taiwan cancer center from 2005 to 2014. Among them, 490 ERBC patients (identified by the PAM50 or immunohistochemistry method) were classified by DGM-CM6 into low- and high-risk groups (cutoff <33 and ≥33, respectively). Significant differences were observed between the DGM-CM6 low- and high-risk groups for 10-year distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) in both lymph node (LN)- (P < 0.05) and LN+ patients (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis confirmed the independent strength of DGM-CM6 for the prediction of high- vs. low- risk groups for DRFS (P < 0.0001, HR: 6.76, 95% CI, 1.8-25.42) and overall survival (P = 0.01, HR: 6.06, 95% CI:1.55-23.47), respectively. In summary, DGM-CM6 may be used to classify low- and high-risk groups for 10-year distant recurrence in both LN- and LN+ ERBC patients in the Asian population. A large scale clinical trial is warranted.
| S-EPMC7263173 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Identifying imaging phenotypes and understanding their relationship with prognostic markers and patient outcomes can allow for a noninvasive assessment of cancer. The purpose of this study was to identify and validate intrinsic imaging phenotypes of breast cancer heterogeneity in preoperative breast dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) scans and evaluate their prognostic performance in predicting 10 years recurrence. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:Pretreatment DCE-MRI scans of 95 women with primary invasive breast cancer with at least 10 years of follow-up from a clinical trial at our institution (2002-2006) were retrospectively analyzed. For each woman, a signal enhancement ratio (SER) map was generated for the entire segmented primary lesion volume from which 60 radiomic features of texture and morphology were extracted. Intrinsic phenotypes of tumor heterogeneity were identified via unsupervised hierarchical clustering of the extracted features. An independent sample of 163 women diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer (2002-2006), publicly available via The Cancer Imaging Archive, was used to validate phenotype reproducibility. RESULTS:Three significant phenotypes of low, medium, and high heterogeneity were identified in the discovery cohort and reproduced in the validation cohort (P < 0.01). Kaplan-Meier curves showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) in recurrence-free survival (RFS) across phenotypes. Radiomic phenotypes demonstrated added prognostic value (c = 0.73) predicting RFS. CONCLUSIONS:Intrinsic imaging phenotypes of breast cancer tumor heterogeneity at primary diagnosis can predict 10-year recurrence. The independent and additional prognostic value of imaging heterogeneity phenotypes suggests that radiomic phenotypes can provide a noninvasive characterization of tumor heterogeneity to augment personalized prognosis and treatment.
| S-EPMC7024654 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6464919 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Expression profiling of breast cancer tumours, comparing 10 year survivors to deceased patients Background It is of great significance to find better markers to correctly distinguish between high-risk and low-risk breast cancer patients since the majority of breast cancer cases are at present being overtreated. Methods 46 tumours from node-negative breast cancer patients were studied with gene expression microarrays. A t-test was carried out in order to find a set of genes where the expression might predict clinical outcome. Two classifiers were used to evaluate the gene lists on the different data sets, a correlation-based classifier and a VFI (Voting Features Interval) classifier. We then evaluated the predictive accuracy of this expression signature on tumour sets from two similar studies on lymph-node negative patients which had developed gene expression signatures superior to current methods in classifying node-negative breast tumours. These two signatures were also tested on our material. Results A list of 51 genes whose expression profiles could predict clinical outcome with high accuracy in our material (96% or 89% accuracy in cross-validation, depending on type of classifier) was developed. When tested on two independent data sets, the expression signature based on the 51 identified genes had good predictive qualities in one of the data sets (74% accuracy), whereas their predictive value on the other data set were poor, presumably due to the fact that only 23 of the 51 genes were found in that material. We also found that previously developed expression signatures could predict clinical outcome well to moderately well in our material (72% and 61%, respectively). Conclusion The list of 51 genes derived in this study might have potential for clinical utility as a prognostic gene set, and may include candidate genes of potential relevance for clinical outcome in breast cancer. According to the predictions by this expression signature, 30 of the 46 patients should have had different adjuvant treatment than they did. Keywords: Expression Microarray, Lymph-node-negative Breast Cancer, Clinical Outcome, Classification
2008-08-29 | GSE12071 | GEO
Project description:Currently used clinical and histopathological parameters imprecisely define the risk of distant recurrence in breast cancer, underscoring the need for more informative prognostic markers. In the present fluorescence in situ hybridization study of archived surgical specimens, we derived an algorithm for computing a prognostic index (PI) from DNA copy numbers of three genomic regions (CYP24, PDCD6IP, and BIRC5) for estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive (ER/PR+) cancers and a distinct PI (based on NR1D1, SMARCE1, and BIRC5) for estrogen/progesterone receptor-negative (ER/PR-) cancers. Among independent test cases stratified by PI, recurrence rates were significantly higher among high-risk patients than low-risk patients for both ER/PR+ (odds ratio = 9.52, 95% confidence interval >2.12, P = 0.0024) and ER/PR- (odds ratio = 12.3, 95% confidence interval >1.45, P = 0.0188) cancers. Among the entire population, recurrences were significantly more prevalent for cases with PI above the medians for both ER/PR+ (Fisher's exact, P = 1.19 x 10(-5)) and ER/PR- (P = 0.0025) patients and for the node-negative subsets (ER/PR+ node-negative, P = 0.042 and ER/PR- node-negative, P = 0.039). In conclusion, these markers perform well in comparison with other criteria for recurrence risk assessment and can be used with routinely formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded surgical specimens.
| S-EPMC1899419 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One measure of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density improves 5-year breast cancer risk prediction, but the value of sequential measures is unknown. We determined whether two BI-RADS density measures improve the predictive accuracy of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium 5-year risk model compared with one measure.We included 722,654 women of ages 35 to 74 years with two mammograms with BI-RADS density measures on average 1.8 years apart; 13,715 developed invasive breast cancer. We used Cox regression to estimate the relative hazards of breast cancer for age, race/ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, history of breast biopsy, and one or two density measures. We developed a risk prediction model by combining these estimates with 2000-2010 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence and 2010 vital statistics for competing risk of death.The two-measure density model had marginally greater discriminatory accuracy than the one-measure model (AUC, 0.640 vs. 0.635). Of 18.6% of women (134,404 of 722,654) who decreased density categories, 15.4% (20,741 of 134,404) of women whose density decreased from heterogeneously or extremely dense to a lower density category with one other risk factor had a clinically meaningful increase in 5-year risk from <1.67% with the one-density model to ?1.67% with the two-density model.The two-density model has similar overall discrimination to the one-density model for predicting 5-year breast cancer risk and improves risk classification for women with risk factors and a decrease in density.A two-density model should be considered for women whose density decreases when calculating breast cancer risk.
| S-EPMC4452451 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Expression profiling of breast cancer tumours, comparing 10 year survivors to deceased patients Background It is of great significance to find better markers to correctly distinguish between high-risk and low-risk breast cancer patients since the majority of breast cancer cases are at present being overtreated. Methods 46 tumours from node-negative breast cancer patients were studied with gene expression microarrays. A t-test was carried out in order to find a set of genes where the expression might predict clinical outcome. Two classifiers were used to evaluate the gene lists on the different data sets, a correlation-based classifier and a VFI (Voting Features Interval) classifier. We then evaluated the predictive accuracy of this expression signature on tumour sets from two similar studies on lymph-node negative patients which had developed gene expression signatures superior to current methods in classifying node-negative breast tumours. These two signatures were also tested on our material. Results A list of 51 genes whose expression profiles could predict clinical outcome with high accuracy in our material (96% or 89% accuracy in cross-validation, depending on type of classifier) was developed. When tested on two independent data sets, the expression signature based on the 51 identified genes had good predictive qualities in one of the data sets (74% accuracy), whereas their predictive value on the other data set were poor, presumably due to the fact that only 23 of the 51 genes were found in that material. We also found that previously developed expression signatures could predict clinical outcome well to moderately well in our material (72% and 61%, respectively). Conclusion The list of 51 genes derived in this study might have potential for clinical utility as a prognostic gene set, and may include candidate genes of potential relevance for clinical outcome in breast cancer. According to the predictions by this expression signature, 30 of the 46 patients should have had different adjuvant treatment than they did. Keywords: Expression Microarray, Lymph-node-negative Breast Cancer, Clinical Outcome, Classification 23 fresh frozen primary node negative breast cancer tumours from 10 year survivors were compared to 23 tumours from deceased patients in order to find genes where the expression differed between the two groups Microarrays were produced at the Swegene DNA Microarray Resource Center, Department of Oncology, Lund University, Sweden (http://swegene.onk.lu.se). Frozen tumours were homogenized together with TRIzol Reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA). From the cell-suspension total RNA was extracted using RNeasy mini kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The quality of the RNA was evaluated with the Agilent 2100 BioAnalyser (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA). Specimens where the 28S/16S ratio was lower than 1.0 or the RIN-value was lower than 6.7 were excluded from the study. For each sample, Cy3-dCTP (Amersham Biosciences, Buckinghamshire, UK) labelled probes were synthesized from 5 µg of the total tumour RNA and Cy5-dCTP (Amersham Biosciences) labelled reference were synthesized from 5 µg of commercial reference RNA (Universal Human Reference RNA, Stratagene, La Jolla, CA, USA) by reverse transcription. The probes were purified using ChipShot™ labelling cleanup system (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). The hybridizations were carried out using Pronto! Micro Array reagent systems (Corning Inc., Corning, NY, USA). For each sample, labelled tumour cDNA and reference cDNA were co-precipitated and hybridised to the microarray slide. The microarray slides were scanned with Agilent microarray scanner G2565AA (Agilent Technologies) and image analysis was performed using the Genepix 6.0.0.45 software (Axon Instruments, Union City, CA, USA).
2008-08-29 | E-GEOD-12071 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Expression profiling of breast cancer tumours, comparing 10 year survivors to deceased patients Background It is of great significance to find better markers to correctly distinguish between high-risk and low-risk breast cancer patients since the majority of breast cancer cases are at present being overtreated. Methods 46 tumours from node-negative breast cancer patients were studied with gene expression microarrays. A t-test was carried out in order to find a set of genes where the expression might predict clinical outcome. Two classifiers were used to evaluate the gene lists on the different data sets, a correlation-based classifier and a VFI (Voting Features Interval) classifier. We then evaluated the predictive accuracy of this expression signature on tumour sets from two similar studies on lymph-node negative patients which had developed gene expression signatures superior to current methods in classifying node-negative breast tumours. These two signatures were also tested on our material. Results A list of 51 genes whose expression profiles could predict clinical outcome with high accuracy in our material (96% or 89% accuracy in cross-validation, depending on type of classifier) was developed. When tested on two independent data sets, the expression signature based on the 51 identified genes had good predictive qualities in one of the data sets (74% accuracy), whereas their predictive value on the other data set were poor, presumably due to the fact that only 23 of the 51 genes were found in that material. We also found that previously developed expression signatures could predict clinical outcome well to moderately well in our material (72% and 61%, respectively). Conclusion The list of 51 genes derived in this study might have potential for clinical utility as a prognostic gene set, and may include candidate genes of potential relevance for clinical outcome in breast cancer. According to the predictions by this expression signature, 30 of the 46 patients should have had different adjuvant treatment than they did. Keywords: Expression Microarray, Lymph-node-negative Breast Cancer, Clinical Outcome, Classification 23 fresh frozen primary node negative breast cancer tumours from 10 year survivors were compared to 23 tumours from deceased patients in order to find genes where the expression differed between the two groups Microarrays were produced at the Swegene DNA Microarray Resource Center, Department of Oncology, Lund University, Sweden (http://swegene.onk.lu.se). Frozen tumours were homogenized together with TRIzol Reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA). From the cell-suspension total RNA was extracted using RNeasy mini kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The quality of the RNA was evaluated with the Agilent 2100 BioAnalyser (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA). Specimens where the 28S/16S ratio was lower than 1.0 or the RIN-value was lower than 6.7 were excluded from the study. For each sample, Cy3-dCTP (Amersham Biosciences, Buckinghamshire, UK) labelled probes were synthesized from 5 µg of the total tumour RNA and Cy5-dCTP (Amersham Biosciences) labelled reference were synthesized from 5 µg of commercial reference RNA (Universal Human Reference RNA, Stratagene, La Jolla, CA, USA) by reverse transcription. The probes were purified using ChipShot™ labelling cleanup system (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). The hybridizations were carried out using Pronto! Micro Array reagent systems (Corning Inc., Corning, NY, USA). For each sample, labelled tumour cDNA and reference cDNA were co-precipitated and hybridised to the microarray slide. The microarray slides were scanned with Agilent microarray scanner G2565AA (Agilent Technologies) and image analysis was performed using the Genepix 6.0.0.45 software (Axon Instruments, Union City, CA, USA).
| S-ECPF-GEOD-12071 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND: It is of great significance to find better markers to correctly distinguish between high-risk and low-risk breast cancer patients since the majority of breast cancer cases are at present being overtreated. METHODS: 46 tumours from node-negative breast cancer patients were studied with gene expression microarrays. A t-test was carried out in order to find a set of genes where the expression might predict clinical outcome. Two classifiers were used for evaluation of the gene lists, a correlation-based classifier and a Voting Features Interval (VFI) classifier. We then evaluated the predictive accuracy of this expression signature on tumour sets from two similar studies on lymph-node negative patients. They had both developed gene expression signatures superior to current methods in classifying node-negative breast tumours. These two signatures were also tested on our material. RESULTS: A list of 51 genes whose expression profiles could predict clinical outcome with high accuracy in our material (96% or 89% accuracy in cross-validation, depending on type of classifier) was developed. When tested on two independent data sets, the expression signature based on the 51 identified genes had good predictive qualities in one of the data sets (74% accuracy), whereas their predictive value on the other data set were poor, presumably due to the fact that only 23 of the 51 genes were found in that material. We also found that previously developed expression signatures could predict clinical outcome well to moderately well in our material (72% and 61%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The list of 51 genes derived in this study might have potential for clinical utility as a prognostic gene set, and may include candidate genes of potential relevance for clinical outcome in breast cancer. According to the predictions by this expression signature, 30 of the 46 patients may have benefited from different adjuvant treatment than they received.
| S-EPMC2559847 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRecommendations for adjuvant therapy after surgical resection of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) are based solely on TNM classification but are agnostic to genomic and high-risk clinicopathologic factors. Creation of a prediction model that integrates tumor genomic and clinicopathologic factors may better identify patients at risk for recurrence.ObjectiveTo identify tumor genomic factors independently associated with recurrence, even in the presence of aggressive, high-risk clinicopathologic variables, in patients with completely resected stages I to III LUAD, and to develop a computational machine-learning prediction model (PRecur) to determine whether the integration of genomic and clinicopathologic features could better predict risk of recurrence, compared with the TNM system.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective cohort study included 426 patients treated from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2017, at a single large cancer center and selected in consecutive samples. Eligibility criteria included complete surgical resection of stages I to III LUAD, broad-panel next-generation sequencing data with matched clinicopathologic data, and no neoadjuvant therapy. External validation of the PRecur prediction model was performed using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Data were analyzed from 2014 to 2018.Main outcomes and measuresThe study end point consisted of relapse-free survival (RFS), estimated using the Kaplan-Meier approach. Associations among clinicopathologic factors, genomic alterations, and RFS were established using Cox proportional hazards regression. The PRecur prediction model integrated genomic and clinicopathologic factors using gradient-boosting survival regression for risk group generation and prediction of RFS. A concordance probability estimate (CPE) was used to assess the predictive ability of the PRecur model.ResultsOf the 426 patients included in the analysis (286 women [67%]; median age at surgery, 69 [interquartile range, 62-75] years), 318 (75%) had stage I cancer. Association analysis showed that alterations in SMARCA4 (clinicopathologic-adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.44; 95% CI, 1.03-5.77; P = .042) and TP53 (clinicopathologic-adjusted HR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.09-2.73; P = .02) and the fraction of genome altered (clinicopathologic-adjusted HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.10-1.04; P = .005) were independently associated with RFS. The PRecur prediction model outperformed the TNM-based model (CPE, 0.73 vs 0.61; difference, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.05-0.19]; P < .001) for prediction of RFS. To validate the prediction model, PRecur was applied to the TCGA LUAD data set (n = 360), and a clear separation of risk groups was noted (log-rank statistic, 7.5; P = .02), confirming external validation.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that integration of tumor genomics and clinicopathologic features improves risk stratification and prediction of recurrence after surgical resection of early-stage LUAD. Improved identification of patients at risk for recurrence could enrich and enhance accrual to adjuvant therapy clinical trials.
| S-EPMC7758824 | biostudies-literature