Abstract P3-12-11: Survival differences in Filipino versus white women with breast cancer in the United States: A SEER-based analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Purpose: We compared survival rates for American Filipino and White women with breast cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database diagnosed between 2004 and 2015. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Filipino and White women with breast cancer diagnosed between 2004 to 2015 in the SEER18 registries database. We collected data on age and year at diagnosis, median household income, marital status, tumour size, tumour grade, lymph node status, stage, receptor status (ER, PR, and HER-2/neu receptor), surgical treatment (lumpectomy versus mastectomy), receipt of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and death. Filippino and White women were compared for demographic, pathologic and treatment variables and differences were assessed using standardized differences. We compared crude breast cancer-specific mortality rates between the two ethnic groups. We also calculated adjusted hazard ratios (HR) in a propensity-matched design using the Cox proportional hazards model. Women were matched on the year and age at diagnosis (both within 2 years), tumour grade, nodal status, clinical stage, ER status, HER2/neu status and propensity score. The propensity score accounted for marital status, household income, tumour size, PR status and surgical procedure. A log-rank test was used to compare differences between groups using the Kaplan-Meier method. P values < .05 were considered statistically significant. Results: There were 10,834 Filipino women (2.5%) and 414,618 White women (97.5%) with stage I-IV breast cancer captured in the SEER database. Mean age at diagnosis was younger for Filipino women compared with White women (57.5 vs 60.8 years, P < .0001). There was a higher proportion of Filipino women presenting with a higher clinical stage at presentation (P < .0001), node-positivity (35.4% vs 33.4%, P = .0002), and HER-2 positivity (12.1% vs 7.4%, P < .0001) compared with White women. Among women with stage I-IIIC breast cancer, 10-year breast cancer-specific survival was 87.7% for Filipino women, compared with 85.6% for White women. Filipino women had a lower rate of breast cancer-specific death as compared with White women (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78 - 0.89; P < .0001). We performed a 1:3 propensity-matched analysis and matched 8,120 Filipino patients to 24,360 white patients. The cancer-specific survival from breast cancer after 10 years of follow-up among matched patients was 92.9% for Filipino women and 90.2% for White women. The hazard ratio in the matched analysis was 0.73 (95% CI 0.66 - 0.81), compared with the crude hazard ratio of 0.84 (95% CI 0.78 - 0.89). The matched analysis demonstrate that Filipino women had better survival than White women overall, and within subgroups defined by age of diagnosis, tumour grade, clinical stage, nodal status, estrogen receptor and HER2 receptor status. The most pronounced effects were observed for HER2 positivity (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20-0.71), node-negative patients (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57-0.82) and stage II patients (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58 - 0.79). Conclusion: Filipino women with breast cancer present with more advanced disease compared to White women but have a better breast cancer-specific survival. Over a 13-year follow-up period, Filipino women with stage I-IIIC breast cancer experienced a 27% reduction in rate of breast cancer death as compared with White women with similar cancers. Compliance with treatment and follow-up or intrinsic biological differences may underlie the improved survival of Filipino women compared with White women, despite presenting with more advanced disease. Citation Format: David Wai Lim, Vasily Giannakeas, Steven A Narod. Survival differences in Filipino versus white women with breast cancer in the United States: A SEER-based analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-12-11.
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 | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 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 | 0,000 |
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 ».