Cargando…

Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models

BACKGROUND: Several prognostic models have been proposed and demonstrated to be predictive of survival outcomes in breast cancer. In the present article, we assessed whether three of these models are comparable at an individual level. METHODS: We used a large data set (n=965) of women with hormone r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Laas, E, Mallon, P, Delomenie, M, Gardeux, V, Pierga, J-Y, Cottu, P, Lerebours, F, Stevens, D, Rouzier, R, Reyal, F
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25590666
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.641
_version_ 1782374526093361152
author Laas, E
Mallon, P
Delomenie, M
Gardeux, V
Pierga, J-Y
Cottu, P
Lerebours, F
Stevens, D
Rouzier, R
Reyal, F
author_facet Laas, E
Mallon, P
Delomenie, M
Gardeux, V
Pierga, J-Y
Cottu, P
Lerebours, F
Stevens, D
Rouzier, R
Reyal, F
author_sort Laas, E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Several prognostic models have been proposed and demonstrated to be predictive of survival outcomes in breast cancer. In the present article, we assessed whether three of these models are comparable at an individual level. METHODS: We used a large data set (n=965) of women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative early breast cancer from the public data set of the METABRIC (Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium) study. We compared the overall performance of three validated web-based models: Adjuvant!, CancerMath.net and PREDICT, and we assessed concordance of these models in 10-year survival prediction. RESULTS: Discrimination performances of the three calculators to predict 10-year survival were similar for the Adjuvant! Model, 0.74 (95% CI 0.71–0.77) for the Cancermath.net model and 0.72 (95% CI 0.69–0.75) for the PREDICT model). Calibration performances, assessed graphically, were satisfactory. Predictions were concordant and stable in the subgroup, with a predicted survival higher than 90% with a median score dispersion at 0.08 (range 0.06–0.10). Dispersion, however, reached 30% for the subgroups with a predicted survival between 10 and 50%. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the three web-based predictors equally perform well at the population level, but exhibit a high degree of discordance in the intermediate and poor prognosis groups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4453945
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44539452016-03-03 Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models Laas, E Mallon, P Delomenie, M Gardeux, V Pierga, J-Y Cottu, P Lerebours, F Stevens, D Rouzier, R Reyal, F Br J Cancer Epidemiology BACKGROUND: Several prognostic models have been proposed and demonstrated to be predictive of survival outcomes in breast cancer. In the present article, we assessed whether three of these models are comparable at an individual level. METHODS: We used a large data set (n=965) of women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative early breast cancer from the public data set of the METABRIC (Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium) study. We compared the overall performance of three validated web-based models: Adjuvant!, CancerMath.net and PREDICT, and we assessed concordance of these models in 10-year survival prediction. RESULTS: Discrimination performances of the three calculators to predict 10-year survival were similar for the Adjuvant! Model, 0.74 (95% CI 0.71–0.77) for the Cancermath.net model and 0.72 (95% CI 0.69–0.75) for the PREDICT model). Calibration performances, assessed graphically, were satisfactory. Predictions were concordant and stable in the subgroup, with a predicted survival higher than 90% with a median score dispersion at 0.08 (range 0.06–0.10). Dispersion, however, reached 30% for the subgroups with a predicted survival between 10 and 50%. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the three web-based predictors equally perform well at the population level, but exhibit a high degree of discordance in the intermediate and poor prognosis groups. Nature Publishing Group 2015-03-03 2015-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4453945/ /pubmed/25590666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.641 Text en Copyright © 2015 Cancer Research UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
spellingShingle Epidemiology
Laas, E
Mallon, P
Delomenie, M
Gardeux, V
Pierga, J-Y
Cottu, P
Lerebours, F
Stevens, D
Rouzier, R
Reyal, F
Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models
title Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models
title_full Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models
title_fullStr Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models
title_full_unstemmed Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models
title_short Are we able to predict survival in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer? A comparison of web-based models
title_sort are we able to predict survival in er-positive her2-negative breast cancer? a comparison of web-based models
topic Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25590666
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.641
work_keys_str_mv AT laase areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT mallonp areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT delomeniem areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT gardeuxv areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT piergajy areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT cottup areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT lereboursf areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT stevensd areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT rouzierr areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels
AT reyalf areweabletopredictsurvivalinerpositiveher2negativebreastcanceracomparisonofwebbasedmodels