Abstract P6-01-39: The impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score® assay upon physician treatment recommendations in the neoadjuvant setting in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients in a multicenter prospective study in Quebec
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Although the role of the 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score® assay is well established to predict response to adjuvant chemotherapy in the setting of node-negative hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancers (BC), fewer studies have evaluated the assay in the neoadjuvant setting. Due to the correlation between a high Recurrence Score® (RS) result and pathological complete response (pCR), the Breast Recurrence Score assay has been used to aid in selecting between chemotherapy (CT) or endocrine therapy. We wanted to further understand the impact of the assay upon physician treatment recommendations and the use of chemotherapy in this patient cohort. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study in patients with clinically node-negative HR-positive, HER2-negative BC with T2-T3 disease being considered for neoadjuvant therapy. Physicians were required to complete two questionnaires indicating treatment choice, including CT, endocrine therapy, or surgery, prior to and post availability of RS result. Patients were followed up for 6 months after commencement of neoadjuvant therapy. The primary objective was to evaluate the change in the physician’s recommendation for neoadjuvant CT prior to and post assay results. As a secondary objective, we also evaluated the impact of the RS result on physician’s expressed level of confidence. Results: A total of 70 patients were enrolled between April 2018 and November 2021 at five hospital centers, as part of the McPeak Sirois Group of Quebec. The median age of the cohort was 60 years (range, 30 to 79 years). 24.3 % (n=17) of the cohort consisted of patients aged < 50 years, and 75.7% (n=53) were ≥ to 50 years. 29.0% (n=20) of the patients had a RS < 16, 39.1% (n=27) had a RS between 16-25, and 31.9% (n=22) had a RS > 25. For the entire cohort, the RS result led to a net reduction in chemotherapy recommendation by 33.3% (OR (odds of having CT post-RS recommendation versus pre-RS recommendation) = 0.23 [95% CI: 0.12-0.44]; P< 0.0001), and 39.2% net reduction in the use of chemotherapy at 6-month follow-up (OR = 0.18 [95% CI: 0.09-0.35]; P< 0.0001). Furthermore, the RS result led to a 35.3% net reduction in physician recommendation of CT for patients < 50 years (OR = 0.19 [95% CI: 0.04-0.83]; P=0.027) and a 32.7% net reduction for patients ≥ 50 years (OR = 0.24 [95% CI: 0.11-0.50]; P=0.0001). For patients with a RS < 16, there was a reduction in CT recommendation by 75.0%, and by 44.4% for patients with a RS between 16 - 25 (OR = 0.15 [95% CI: 0.06-0.38]; P< 0.0001). Moreover, RS results led to an increase in confidence in physician treatment decisions for 59.4% of patients (OR = 12.53 [95% CI: 5.46-28.78]; P< 0.0001). Conclusion: We determined that the 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score assay altered neoadjuvant treatment decisions, leading to a reduction in the use of chemotherapy by about one-third, regardless of age. Additionally, the assay increased physician confidence in their treatment recommendation for about 60% of patients. This demonstrates the potential clinical utility of the assay to decrease the use of CT in the neoadjuvant setting amongst HR-positive, node-negative BC patients in Quebec. Citation Format: Mariya Yordanova, Lucas Sideris, Pierre Dubé, Jean-Francois Boileau, Julie Lemieux, Catalin Mihalcioiu, Sylvie Levesque, Marie-Claude Guertin, Erica Patocskai, Rami Younan, André Robidoux, Saima Hassan. The impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score® assay upon physician treatment recommendations in the neoadjuvant setting in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients in a multicenter prospective study in Quebec [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-01-39.
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 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».