Abstract P4-07-02: Clinicopathological features and BRCA 1/2 status in a large prospective cohort of young women with breast cancer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Breast cancer arising in young women is more likely to have higher risk features than in older women and more likely to be associated with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. We previously reported a higher distribution of luminal B-like tumors among young women. Here we present the clinical and pathologic features of invasive disease in a large prospective cohort of young women with breast cancer, and associations between surrogate molecular subtype and BRCA 1/2 mutation status. Methods: Among 1,297 young women (aged ≤40 years) with breast cancer enrolled from 2006-2016, tumor histopathological features were examined by central review, and biomarker status was extracted from pathology reports. Based on histologic grade and biomarker expression, invasive tumors were categorized as luminal A-like (LA=ER/PR+ and HER2-, histologic grade 1 or 2), luminal B-like (LB=ER/PR+ and HER2+, or ER/PR+, HER2-, and grade 3), HER2 enriched (E) (ER/PR- and HER2+) or triple negative (TN=ER-, PR- and HER2-). Tumor stage, clinical characteristics, and BRCA status were retrieved by medical record review (and patient survey for BRCA status if not in medical record). Results: The majority of women presented with early stage invasive disease (8% stage 0, 32% stage 1, 40% stage 2, 15% stage 3; 5% stage 4). Among invasive tumors with evaluable molecular phenotype (n=1,136), 57% were high grade and the distribution of subtypes was: 33% LA, 42% LB, 8% HER2E, and 16% TN (Table 1). Among different age groups (≤ 30, 31-35, and 36-40 years), there were no significant differences in molecular phenotype, tumor stage, tumor grade or histopathological features including presence of tumor necrosis, lymphocytic infiltration, and central fibrotic focus. 96% of women were tested for BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations, and 127 (11%) tested positive: 65% were BRCA1+, and 35% were BRCA2+ (table 2). Among BRCA1+ patients, 2% of cancers were LA, 30% LB, 5% HER2E, and 62% TN; among BRCA2+, 29% were LA, 56% LB, 2% HER2E, and 13% TN. These proportions were relatively consistent across age groups. BRCA1+ patients’ tumors were proportionately more TN and BRCA2+ patients’ tumors more likely to be LB/HER2 negative (p<0.0001), irrespective of age category. Conclusion: In a large cohort of women diagnosed with breast cancer at age ≤40, there was no association between age group (≤ 30, 31-35, vs. 36-40 years) and tumor stage, grade, or tumor molecular phenotype among women with invasive disease. As in older women, tumor molecular phenotype does vary by BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation status, which has implications for prevention and treatment. Table 1. Subtype by age groupTotal (n=1136)≤30 yrs (n=144)31-35 yrs (n=314)36-40 yrs (n=678)p=0.42Luminal A-like377 (33%)48 (33%)99 (32%)230 (34%)Luminal B-like477 (42%)59 (41%)137 (44%)281 (41%)• ER/PR+, HER2-, grade 3245 (22%)27 (19%)68 (22%)150 (22%)• ER/PR+, HER2+232 (20%)32 (22%)69 (22%)131 (19%)HER2E95 (8%)13 (9%)34 (11%)48 (7%)Triple Negative187 (16%)24 (17%)44 (14%)119 (18%) Table 2. Subtype by BRCA statusTotal(n=1136)BRCA1+(n=82)BRCA2+(n=45)No mutation/not tested(n=1009)p<0.0001Luminal A-like377 (33%)2 (2%)13 (29%)362 (36%)Luminal B-like477 (42%)25 (30%)25 (56%)427 (42%)• ER/PR+, HER2-, grade 3245 (22%)21 (26%)18 (40%)206 (20%)• ER/PR+, HER2+232 (20%)4 (5%)7 (16%)221 (22%)HER2E95 (8%)4 (5%)1 (2%)90 (9%)Triple Negative187 (16%)51 (62%)6 (13%)130 (13%) Citation Format: Yaileen D Guzman-Arocho, Shoshana M. Rosenberg, Philip Poorvu, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Greg Kirkner, Craig Snow, Rulla M. Tamimi, Jeffrey Peppercorn, Lidia Schapira, Virginia F. Borges, Steven E. Come, Elena F. Brachtel, Ellen Warner, Ann H. Partridge, Laura C. Collins. Clinicopathological features and BRCA 1/2 status in a large prospective cohort of young women with breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-07-02.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».