Cargando…

Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data

BACKGROUND: PREDICT is a widely used online prognostication and treatment benefit tool for patients with early stage breast cancer. The aim of this study was to conduct an independent validation exercise of the most up-to-date version of the PREDICT algorithm (version 2) using real-world outcomes fr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gray, Ewan, Marti, Joachim, Brewster, David H., Wyatt, Jeremy C., Hall, Peter S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6189179/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30220705
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0256-x
_version_ 1783363310654062592
author Gray, Ewan
Marti, Joachim
Brewster, David H.
Wyatt, Jeremy C.
Hall, Peter S.
author_facet Gray, Ewan
Marti, Joachim
Brewster, David H.
Wyatt, Jeremy C.
Hall, Peter S.
author_sort Gray, Ewan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: PREDICT is a widely used online prognostication and treatment benefit tool for patients with early stage breast cancer. The aim of this study was to conduct an independent validation exercise of the most up-to-date version of the PREDICT algorithm (version 2) using real-world outcomes from the Scottish population of women with breast cancer. METHODS: Patient data were obtained for all Scottish Cancer Registry (SCR) records with a diagnosis of primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed in the period between January 2001 and December 2015. Prognostic scores were calculated using the PREDICT version 2 algorithm. External validity was assessed by statistical analysis of discrimination and calibration. Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver-operator curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed by comparing the predicted number of deaths to the observed number of deaths across relevant sub-groups. RESULTS: A total of 45,789 eligible cases were selected from 61,437 individual records. AUC statistics ranged from 0.74 to 0.77. Calibration results showed relatively close agreement between predicted and observed deaths. The 5-year complete follow-up sample reported some overestimation (11.5%), while the 10-year complete follow-up sample displayed more limited overestimation (1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Validation results suggest that the PREDICT tool remains essentially relevant for contemporary patients with early stage breast cancer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6189179
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61891792019-09-17 Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data Gray, Ewan Marti, Joachim Brewster, David H. Wyatt, Jeremy C. Hall, Peter S. Br J Cancer Article BACKGROUND: PREDICT is a widely used online prognostication and treatment benefit tool for patients with early stage breast cancer. The aim of this study was to conduct an independent validation exercise of the most up-to-date version of the PREDICT algorithm (version 2) using real-world outcomes from the Scottish population of women with breast cancer. METHODS: Patient data were obtained for all Scottish Cancer Registry (SCR) records with a diagnosis of primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed in the period between January 2001 and December 2015. Prognostic scores were calculated using the PREDICT version 2 algorithm. External validity was assessed by statistical analysis of discrimination and calibration. Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver-operator curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed by comparing the predicted number of deaths to the observed number of deaths across relevant sub-groups. RESULTS: A total of 45,789 eligible cases were selected from 61,437 individual records. AUC statistics ranged from 0.74 to 0.77. Calibration results showed relatively close agreement between predicted and observed deaths. The 5-year complete follow-up sample reported some overestimation (11.5%), while the 10-year complete follow-up sample displayed more limited overestimation (1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Validation results suggest that the PREDICT tool remains essentially relevant for contemporary patients with early stage breast cancer. Nature Publishing Group UK 2018-09-17 2018-10-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6189179/ /pubmed/30220705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0256-x Text en © Cancer Research UK 2018 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is published under the standard license to publish agreement. After 12 months the work will become freely available and the license terms will switch to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
spellingShingle Article
Gray, Ewan
Marti, Joachim
Brewster, David H.
Wyatt, Jeremy C.
Hall, Peter S.
Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data
title Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data
title_full Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data
title_fullStr Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data
title_full_unstemmed Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data
title_short Independent validation of the PREDICT breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using Scottish Cancer Registry data
title_sort independent validation of the predict breast cancer prognosis prediction tool in 45,789 patients using scottish cancer registry data
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6189179/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30220705
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0256-x
work_keys_str_mv AT grayewan independentvalidationofthepredictbreastcancerprognosispredictiontoolin45789patientsusingscottishcancerregistrydata
AT martijoachim independentvalidationofthepredictbreastcancerprognosispredictiontoolin45789patientsusingscottishcancerregistrydata
AT brewsterdavidh independentvalidationofthepredictbreastcancerprognosispredictiontoolin45789patientsusingscottishcancerregistrydata
AT wyattjeremyc independentvalidationofthepredictbreastcancerprognosispredictiontoolin45789patientsusingscottishcancerregistrydata
AT hallpeters independentvalidationofthepredictbreastcancerprognosispredictiontoolin45789patientsusingscottishcancerregistrydata
AT independentvalidationofthepredictbreastcancerprognosispredictiontoolin45789patientsusingscottishcancerregistrydata