Back to Search
Start Over
Cross comparison and prognostic assessment of breast cancer multigene signatures in a large population-based contemporary clinical series
- Publication Year :
- 2019
-
Abstract
- Multigene expression signatures provide a molecular subdivision of early breast cancer associated with patient outcome. A gap remains in the validation of such signatures in clinical treatment groups of patients within population-based cohorts of unselected primary breast cancer representing contemporary disease stages and current treatments. A cohort of 3520 resectable breast cancers with RNA sequencing data included in the population-based SCAN-B initiative (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02306096) were selected from a healthcare background population of 8587 patients diagnosed within the years 2010-2015. RNA profiles were classified according to 19 reported gene signatures including both gene expression subtypes (e.g. PAM50, IC10, CIT) and risk predictors (e.g. Oncotype DX, 70-gene, ROR). Classifications were analyzed in nine adjuvant clinical assessment groups: TNBC-ACT (adjuvant chemotherapy, n = 239), TNBC-untreated (n = 82), HER2+/ER- with anti-HER2+ACT treatment (n = 110), HER2+/ER+ with anti-HER2 + ACT + endocrine treatment (n = 239), ER+/HER2-/LN- with endocrine treatment (n = 1113), ER+/HER2-/LN- with endocrine +ACT treatment (n = 243), ER+/HER2-/LN+ with endocrine treatment (n = 423), ER+/HER2-/LN+ with endocrine +ACT treatment (n = 433), and ER+/HER2-/LN- untreated (n = 200). Gene signature classification (e.g., proportion low-, high-risk) was generally well aligned with stratification based on current immunohistochemistry-based clinical practice. Most signatures did not provide any further risk stratification in TNBC and HER2+/ER- disease. Risk classifier agreement (low-, medium/intermediate-, high-risk groups) in ER+ assessment groups was on average 50-60% with occasional pair-wise comparisons having <30% agreement. Disregarding the intermediate-risk groups, the exact agreement between low- and high-risk groups was on average similar to 80-95%, for risk prediction signatures across all assessment groups. Outcome analyses were restricted to assessment gro
Details
- Database :
- OAIster
- Notes :
- application/pdf, English
- Publication Type :
- Electronic Resource
- Accession number :
- edsoai.on1233944378
- Document Type :
- Electronic Resource
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1038.s41598-019-48570-x