scholarly journals CanAssist Breast Impacting Clinical Treatment Decisions in Early-Stage HR+ Breast Cancer Patients: Indian Scenario

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satish Sankaran ◽  
Jyoti Bajpai Dikshit ◽  
Chandra Prakash SV ◽  
SE Mallikarjuna ◽  
SP Somashekhar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Not Given ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Risk Of Cancer ◽  
The Impact

AbstractCanAssist Breast (CAB) has thus far been validated on a retrospective cohort of 1123 patients who are mostly Indians. Distant metastasis–free survival (DMFS) of more than 95% was observed with significant separation (P < 0.0001) between low-risk and high-risk groups. In this study, we demonstrate the usefulness of CAB in guiding physicians to assess risk of cancer recurrence and to make informed treatment decisions for patients. Of more than 500 patients who have undergone CAB test, detailed analysis of 455 patients who were treated based on CAB-based risk predictions by more than 140 doctors across India is presented here. Majority of patients tested had node negative, T2, and grade 2 disease. Age and luminal subtypes did not affect the performance of CAB. On comparison with Adjuvant! Online (AOL), CAB categorized twice the number of patients into low risk indicating potential of overtreatment by AOL-based risk categorization. We assessed the impact of CAB testing on treatment decisions for 254 patients and observed that 92% low-risk patients were not given chemotherapy. Overall, we observed that 88% patients were either given or not given chemotherapy based on whether they were stratified as high risk or low risk for distant recurrence respectively. Based on these results, we conclude that CAB has been accepted by physicians to make treatment planning and provides a cost-effective alternative to other similar multigene prognostic tests currently available.

scholarly journals Impact of CanAssist-Breast in clinical treatment decisions in early stage HR+ breast cancer patients: Asian Scenario.

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl) ◽  
pp. 109-109
Author(s):  
Viswanathan Gopalakrishnan ◽  
Satish Sankaran ◽  
Mallikarjuna SE ◽  
Chandra Prakash ◽  
Manjiri Manohar Bakre
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Distant Recurrence ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Not Given ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Prognostic Tests

109 Background: The utility of multigene prognostic tests in aiding treatment decisions for early stage hormone positive breast cancer patients is well recognized. CanAssist-Breast (CAB) is an immunohistochemistry (IHC) based prognostic test that uses a proprietary algorithm to combine IHC grading of 5 biomarkers and three clinical paramaters (tumor size, node status and Grade) to stratify patients into high or low risk of distant recurrence. CAB has thus far been validated on a retrospective cohort of > 1000 predominantly Asian patients. Distant Metastasis Free Survival (DMFS) of more than 95% was observed with significant separation (P < 0.001) between low-risk and high-risk groups. In this study we demonstrate the usefulness of CanAssist-Breast (CAB) in guiding physicians assess risk of cancer recurrence and to make informed treatment decisions for patients. Methods: A total of 353 Asian patients tested by > 100 physicians were included in this study. Clinical parameters were compiled from hospital data. Treatment decisions were confirmed for > 150 of these patients assess the level of adherence. Risk prediction using the modified Adjuvant! Online protocol was used to compare with performance of CAB. Luminal subtying was performed as per the St. Gallen’s criteria. Results: Majority of patients tested had node negative, T2 and Grade 2 disease. Age and luminal subtypes did not affect the performance of CAB. On comparison with Adjuvant! Online (AOL), CAB categorized twice the number of patients into low-risk. Impact of CAB testing on treatment decisions showed that 96% of low-risk patients were not given chemotherapy and 84% of high-risk patients were given chemotherapy. Overall, we observed that 92% patients were either given or not given chemotherapy based on whether they were stratified as high-risk or low-risk for distant recurrence respectively. Conclusions: CAB stratifies higher percentage of patients into low risk group as compared to AOL. We observed wide acceptance of CAB as a prognostic test for assisting treatment decsions in clinical settings. CAB helped avoid chemotherapy in 70% of patients tested thus providing a cost effective alternative to other prognostic tests currently available.

A prospective study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on treatment decisions in N-, ER+ early stage breast cancer patients

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11008-11008 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Ben-Baruch ◽  
A. Hammerman ◽  
S. Klang ◽  
N. Liebermann
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Recurrence Score ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
The Impact

11008 Background: The Oncotype DX™ Recurrence Score (RS) assay predicts distant recurrence risk and benefit of chemotherapy (CT) in N-, ER+ breast cancer patients (pts). In February 2006, Clalit Health Services in Israel (CHS) was the first public health insurer to reimburse the assay outside the USA. Methods: CHS requires a pre-authorization form with data on biological parameters and specification of treatment (Rx) recommendation (1) before knowledge of RS and (2) the Rx planned according to each of 3 possible RS risk levels. For the first 200 reimbursed assays, we compared: (1) the Rx offered without RS knowledge, (2) the Rx the patient actually received after RS, and (3) the planned Rx stated on the form to be given according to the RS. Results: 200 pts. Median age: 57 yrs (34–81). RS: Low risk (RS<18), 37.5%; Intermediate (int) risk (RS 18–30), 44.5%; High risk (RS≥31), 18%. In 20 pts, Rx recommendations before RS were not specified. Before the RS, CT was offered in 106/180 (59%) and hormonal therapy (HT) in 74/180 (41%). In 71/180 pts (39%) the actual Rx changed from the recommendation before RS - CT to HT in 62 pts (low risk: 37, int risk: 21, high risk: 4) and HT to CT in 9 pts (int risk: 4, high risk: 5). Suggested therapy by RS was not specified in 19 pts. In 30/181 (17%) actual Rx differed from planned - CT to HT in 20 pts (int risk: 17, high risk: 3) and HT to CT in 10 pts (low risk: 4, int risk: 6). Conclusions: RS changed the treatment decision in a significant proportion of pts (39%), mostly from CT to HT. In 58% of pts originally offered CT, knowledge of RS changed the Rx to HT. 12% of pts originally offered HT were treated with CT. Rx decisions in intermediate RS are sometimes not obvious. In 26% of intermediate RS, final Rx differed from original plan; in these cases, patients’ preferences might have had a major impact on decision making. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Recurrence risk stratification by Dutch clinical risk criteria for early-stage luminal breast cancer patients in Taiwan: A population-based analysis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12509-e12509
Author(s):  
Lei Lei ◽  
Han-Ching Chan ◽  
Wang Xiao Jia ◽  
Tzu-Pin Lu ◽  
Skye Hung-Chun Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Luminal Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

e12509 Background: Dutch clinical risk criteria (low-risk definition: age > 35 years and (grade 1 with tumor ≤3cm, grade 2 with tumor ≤2cm, or grade 3 with tumor ≤1cm) have been used to stratify the benefit of MammaPrint and Oncotype DX for the decision-making regarding adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage luminal breast cancer. We propose that the criteria could help to identify low-risk patients who could barely benefit from multi-gene testing. Methods: Breast cancer patients from Taiwan Cancer Database initially treated with primary surgeries between 2008 and 2012 who met the following criteria: (1) pathologic node-negative, (2) hormone receptor-positive, (3) HER2-negative, (4) undergone hormonal therapy, and (5) a minimum follow-up time of 5-year if free from any event, were enrolled in this study. Out of the total 2679 eligible patients, 1074 (40.1%) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy in addition to endocrine therapy. The study endpoints included breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier statistics estimated the difference between clinical outcomes in low- and high-risk groups. Results: The median follow-up time of BSCC and OS was 5.9 years (range, 0-7 years) and 5.8 years (range, 0-7 years), respectively. There were statistical significances of 5-year BCSS (n = 2679) and 5-year OS (n = 2636) between low-risk and high-risk groups (in both endpoints, P < 0.0001). According to the Dutch criteria, low-risk patients with and without adjuvant chemotherapy had a 5-year BCSS of 99.0% vs. 99.2% and a 5-year OS of 98.4% vs. 97.4%, respectively. High-risk patients with and without adjuvant chemotherapy had a 5-year BCSS of 97.7% vs. 98.1% and a 5-year OS of 96.4% vs. 95.3%, respectively. Conclusions: The benefit of chemotherapy in low-risk patients classified by Dutch criteria might be very small since the breast cancer mortality was less than 1% with a minimum of 5-year follow-up. Dutch criteria cannot identify high-risk patients who would benefit from chemotherapy. We assumed that multi-gene testing in low-risk patients would not be cost-effective.

The national impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on U.S. prostate cancer community care.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5061-5061
Author(s):  
Matthew R. Cooperberg ◽  
Paul Brendel ◽  
Daniel J. Lee ◽  
Rahul Doraiswami ◽  
Hariesh Rajasekar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
T Stage ◽  
Risk Stratum ◽  
The Impact

5061 Background: We used data from a specialty-wide, community-based urology registry to determine trends in outpatient prostate cancer (PCa) care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: 3,165 (̃ 25%) of US urology providers, representing 48 states and territories, participate in the American Urological Association Quality (AQUA) Registry, which collects data via automated extraction from electronic health record systems. We analyzed trends in PCa care delivery from 156 practices contributing data in 2019 and 2020. Risk stratification was based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) at diagnosis, biopsy Gleason, and clinical T-stage, and we used a natural language processing algorithm to determine Gleason and T-stage from unstructured clinical notes. The primary outcome was mean weekly visit volume by PCa patients per practice (visits defined as all MD and mid-level visits, telehealth and face-to-face), and we compared each week in 2020 through week 44 (November 1) to the corresponding week in 2019. Results: There were 267,691 PCa patients in AQUA who received care between 2019 and 2020. From mid-March to early November, 2020 (week 10 – week 44) the magnitude of the decline and recovery varied by risk stratum, with the steepest drops for low-risk PCa (Table). For 2020, overall mean visits per day (averaged weekly) were similar to 2019 for the first 9 weeks (̃25). Visits declined to week 14 (18.19; a 31% drop from 2019), recovered to 2019 levels by week 23, and declined steadily to 11.89 (a 58% drop from 2019) as of week 44, the cut off of this analysis. Conclusions: Access to care for men with PCa was sharply curtailed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and while the impact was less for men with high-risk disease compared to those with low-risk disease, visits even for high-risk individuals were down nearly one-third and continued to fall through November. This study provides real-world evidence on the magnitude of decline in PCa care across risk groups. The impact of this decline on cancer outcomes should be followed closely.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Impact of Different Modules of 21-Gene Assay in Early Breast Cancer Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mengdi Chen ◽  
Deyue Liu ◽  
Weilin Chen ◽  
Weiguo Chen ◽  
Kunwei Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Gene Assay ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Gene Modules ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundThe 21-gene assay recurrence score (RS) provides additional information on recurrence risk of breast cancer patients and prediction of chemotherapy benefit. Previous studies that examined the contribution of the individual genes and gene modules of RS were conducted mostly in postmenopausal patients. We aimed to evaluate the gene modules of RS in patients of different ages.MethodsA total of 1,078 estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer patients diagnosed between January 2009 and March 2017 from Shanghai Jiao Tong University Breast Cancer Data Base were included. All patients were divided into three subgroups: Group A, ≤40 years and premenopausal (n = 97); Group B, &gt;40 years and premenopausal (n = 284); Group C, postmenopausal (n = 697). The estrogen, proliferation, invasion, and HER2 module scores from RS were used to characterize the respective molecular features. Spearman correlation and analysis of the variance tests were conducted for RS and its constituent modules.ResultsIn patients &gt;40 years, RS had a strong negative correlation with its estrogen module (ρ = −0.76 and −0.79 in Groups B and C) and a weak positive correlation with its invasion module (ρ = 0.29 and 0.25 in Groups B and C). The proliferation module mostly contributed to the variance in young patients (37.3%) while the ER module contributed most in old patients (54.1% and 53.4% in Groups B and C). In the genetic high-risk (RS &gt;25) group, the proliferation module was the leading driver in all patients (ρ = 0.38, 0.53, and 0.52 in Groups A, B, and C) while the estrogen module had a weaker correlation with RS. The impact of ER module on RS was stronger in clinical low-risk patients while the effect of the proliferation module was stronger in clinical high-risk patients. The association between the RS and estrogen module was weaker among younger patients, especially in genetic low-risk patients.ConclusionsRS was primarily driven by the estrogen module regardless of age, but the proliferation module had a stronger impact on RS in younger patients. The impact of modules varied in patients with different genetic and clinical risks.

Prognostic Indices in Older DLBCL Patients Receiving R-CHOP: An Analysis of the U.S. Intergroup Study (E4494, CALGB 9793).

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 813-813
Author(s):  
R.H. Advani ◽  
H. Chen ◽  
T.M. Habermann ◽  
V.A. Morrison ◽  
E. Weller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Category ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Prognostic Tool ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Background: We reported that addition of rituximab (R) to chemotherapy significantly improves outcome in DLBCL patients (pt) &gt;60 years (JCO24:3121–27, 2006). Although the IPI is a robust clinical prognostic tool in DLBCL, Sehn et al (ASH 2005: abstract 492) reported that a revised (R) IPI more accurately predicted outcome in pt treated with rituximab-chemotherapy. Methods: We evaluated outcomes of the Intergroup study with respect to the standard IPI, R-IPI, age-adjusted (aa) IPI for evaluable pt treated with R-CHOP alone or with maintenance rituximab. We further assessed a modified IPI (mIPI) using age ≥ 70 y as a cutoff rather than age 60 y. Results: The 267 pt in this analysis were followed for a median of 4 y. Pt characteristics were: age &gt; 70 (48%) (median=69), male 52%, stage III/IV 75%, &gt;1 EN site 30%, LDH elevated 60%, PS ≥2 15%. On univariate analysis all of these characteristics were significant for 3 y failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS). The IPI provided additional discrimination of risk compared to the R-IPI with significant differences in FFS and OS for 3 vs 4–5 factors. The aa-IPI defined relatively few pt as low or high risk. The impact of age was studied using a cut-off of 70 years in a modified IPI, yielding 4 risk groups as shown below. Conclusions: For pt ≥ 60 treated with rituximab-chemotherapy the distinction between 3 vs 4,5 factors in the IPI was significant.The IPI also provided additional discrimination of risk compared to the R-IPI. In this older group of pt, use of an age cutoff ≥70 y placed more patients in the low risk category. It is of interest to apply the mIPI in other datasets with DLBCL pt &gt;60 y. Group # Factors # Pt % 3y FFS* % 3y OS* *All risk groups significantly different; logrank p &lt; 0.001 **95 % CI: FFS (0.46,0.66), OS (0.58,0.78) ***95 % CI: FFS (0.21,0.45), OS (0.31,0.55) L: Low, LI: Low Intermediate, HI: High Intermediate, H; High IPI L 0–1 12 78 83 LI 2 28 70 80 HI 3 33 56** 68** H 4–5 37 33*** 43*** R-IPI Very Good 0 0 - - Good 1–2 40 72 81 Poor 3–5 60 46 57 aa-IPI L 0 12 78 83 LI 1 35 68 78 HI 2 44 47 59 H 3 9 31 35 mIPI (age ≥ 70) L 0–1 27 77 86 LI 2 28 62 74 HI 3 29 47 58 H 4–5 16 28 36

Impact of the EndoPredict-clin score on risk stratification in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer after considering clinical guidelines.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 542-542
Author(s):  
Martin Filipits ◽  
Peter Christian Dubsky ◽  
Margaretha Rudas ◽  
Jan C. Brase ◽  
Ralf Kronenwett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Endocrine Therapy ◽  
Clinical Guidelines ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Er Positive

542 Background: Many ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer patients are treated by adjuvant chemotherapy according to current clinical guidelines. We retrospectively assessed whether the combined gene expression/ clinicopathological EndoPredict-clin (EPclin) score improved the accuracy of risk classification in addition to considering clinical guidelines. Methods: Three clinical breast cancer guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Center Network (NCCN), German S3 and St. Gallen 2011), and the EPclin score - assessed by quantitative RT-PCR in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue - were used to assign risk groups in 1,702 ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer patients from two randomized phase III trials (Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group 6 and 8) treated with endocrine therapy only. Results: Although all analyzed clinical guidelines identified a low-risk group with improved metastasis-free survival, the overwhelming majority of all patients (81-94%) were classified as intermediate / high risk. In contrast to that, the EPclin classified only 37% of all patients as high risk and that stratification resulted in the best separation between low and high risk groups (p < 0.001, HR = 5.11 (3.48-7.51). Consequently, the majority of all patients deemed intermediate / high risk by the clinical guidelines was re-classified as low risk by the EPclin score. Kaplan Meier analyses demonstrated that the re-classified subgroups (47 to 57% of all patients) had an excellent 10-year metastasis-free survival of 95% comparable to the clinical assigned low-risk groups although encompassing a higher proportion of the trial patients. Conclusions: The EPclin score predicted distant recurrence more accurately than all three clinical guidelines and is especially useful to reclassify patients considered as intermediate / high risk by the guidelines. The data suggests that the EPclin score provides clinically useful prognostic information beyond common clinical guidelines and can be used to accurately identify the clinically relevant group of patients who are adequately and sufficiently treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone.

Breast Cancer Index and risk stratification in luminal subtypes: A trans-ATAC study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 534-534
Author(s):  
Ivana Sestak ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Catherine A. Schnabel ◽  
Jack M. Cuzick ◽  
Mitchell Dowsett
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Luminal A ◽  
Prognostic Information ◽  
Prognostic Performance ◽  
Breast Cancer Index

534 Background: The Breast Cancer Index (BCI) is a gene-expression based signature that provides prognostic information for overall (0-10 years) and late (5-10 years) distant recurrence (DR) and prediction of extended endocrine benefit in hormone receptor positive (HR+) early stage breast cancer. The current analysis aims to further characterize, correlate and compare the prognostic performance of BCI in luminal subtypes based on immunohistochemical classification. Methods: 670 postmenopausal women with HR+, LN- disease from the TransATAC cohort were included in this analysis. Luminal A-like tumors (LumA) were identified as those with ER+ and/or PR+ and HER2 -, and Ki67 < 20% by IHC. All other tumors were classified as Luminal B-like (LumB) for this analysis. Primary endpoint was DR. Cox regression models were used to examine BCI prognostic performance according to luminal subtype, adjusting for the clinicopathological model Clinical Treatment Score (CTS). Results: 452 (67.5%) patients were classified as LumA and 218 (32.5%) as LumB. BCI was highly prognostic in LumA cancers (adjusted HR = 1.57 (1.23-1.96), P < 0.001, ΔLR-χ2= 14.09), but not in LumB tumors (adjusted HR = 1.20 (0.94-1.52, P = 0.14, ΔLR-χ2= 2.23). In LumA, 10-year DR risks in BCI intermediate and high risk groups were very similar (25.6% (16.4-38.6) and 25.3% (13.5-44.3), respectively) and significantly different from BCI low (3.9% (2.1-7.0); HR = 7.47 (3.50-15.96) and HR = 8.13 (3.27-20.23), respectively). In LumB, 10-year DR risks in BCI low and BCI intermediate risk groups (13.8% (6.8-26.9) and 14.6% (8.3-24.9), respectively) were very similar and significantly lower than for the BCI high (29.1% (20.0-41.1)). Lum subtyping was only prognostic in the BCI low risk group (LumA vs. LumB: HR = 4.27 (1.65-11.02)) but not in the other two BCI risk groups. Conclusions: BCI provided significant prognostic information in Lum A subtype. These results show that BCI intermediate and high risk had similar risk of DR in LumA tumors, while shared similarly low risk of DR as BCI-low in LumB tumors. Further evaluation is needed to elucidate the distinct mechanisms underlying each classification system.

Comparative performance of Breast Cancer Index (BCIN+) and CTS5 in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) lymph node-positive (N+) breast cancer patients with one to three positive nodes (N1).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 555-555
Author(s):  
Dennis Sgroi ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Catherine A. Schnabel
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Endocrine Therapy ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients

555 Background: Identification of N+ breast cancer patients with a limited risk of recurrence improves selection of those for which chemotherapy and/or extended endocrine therapy (EET) may be most appropriate to reduce overtreatment. BCIN+ integrates gene expression with tumor size and grade, and is highly prognostic for overall (0-10yr) and late (5-10yr) distant recurrence (DR) in N1 patients. Clinical Treatment Score post-5-years (CTS5) is a prognostic model based on clinicopathological factors (nodes, age, tumor size and grade) and significantly prognostic for late DR. The current analysis compares BCIN+ and CTS5 for risk of late DR in N1 patients. Methods: 349 women with HR+, N1 disease and recurrence-free for ≥5 years were included. BCIN+ results were determined blinded to clinical outcome. CTS5 was calculated as previously described (Dowsett et al, JCO 2018; 36:1941). Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression for late DR (5-15y) were evaluated. Results: 64% of patients were > 50 years old, 34% with tumors > 2cm, 79% received adjuvant chemotherapy and 64% received up to 5 years of ET. BCIN+ stratified 23% of patients as low-risk with 1.3% risk for late DR vs those classified as high-risk with 16.1% [HR 12.4 (1.7-90.4), p = 0.0014]. CTS5 classified patients into 3 risk groups: 29% of patients as low-risk (4.2% DR), 37% as intermediate-risk (10.6% DR), and 34% as high-risk (22.1% DR) [HR intermediate vs. low: 2.3 (0.7-7.0), p = 0.16; high vs. low: 5.3 (1.8-15.5), p = 0.002]. In a subset of patients who completed 5 years of ET (N = 223), BCIN+ identified 22% of patients as low-risk with a late DR rate of 2.1%, while CTS5 identified 29% and 37% of patients as low- and intermediate-risk with late DR rates of 5.2% and 10.3%, respectively. Conclusions: BCIN+ classified N1 patients into binary risk groups and identified 20% patients with limited risk of late DR ( < 2%) that may be advised to forego EET and its attendant toxicities/side effects. In comparison, CTS5 classified patients into 3 risk groups, with low- and intermediate-risk of late DR of 4-5% and 10%, wherein the risk-benefit profile for extension of endocrine therapy is less clear.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document