Tamoxifen resistance in early breast cancer: statistical modelling of tissue markers to improve risk prediction.
BACKGROUND
For over two decades, the Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) has been used in the United Kingdom to calculate risk scores and inform management about breast cancer patients. It is derived using just three clinical variables - nodal involvement, tumour size and grade. New scientific methods now make cost-effective measurement of many biological characteristics of tumour tissue from breast cancer biopsy samples possible. However, the number of potential explanatory variables to be considered presents a statistical challenge. The aim of this study was to investigate whether in ER+ tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients, biological variables can add value to NPI predictors, to provide improved prognostic stratification in terms of overall recurrence-free survival (RFS) and also in terms of remaining recurrence free while on tamoxifen treatment (RFoT). A particular goal was to enable the discrimination of patients with a very low risk of recurrence.


METHODS
Tissue samples of 401 cases were analysed by microarray technology, providing biomarker data for 72 variables in total, from AKT, BAD, HER, MTOR, PgR, MAPK and RAS families. Only biomarkers screened as potentially informative (i.e., exhibiting univariate association with recurrence) were offered to the multivariate model. The multiple imputation method was used to deal with missing values, and bootstrap sampling was used to assess internal validity and refine the model.


RESULTS
Neither the RFS nor RFoT models derived included Grade, but both had better predictive and discrimination ability than NPI. A slight difference was observed between models in terms of biomarkers included, and, in particular, the RFoT model alone included HER2. The estimated 7-year RFS rates in the lowest-risk groups by RFS and RFoT models were 95 and 97%, respectively, whereas the corresponding rate for the lowest-risk group of NPI was 89%.


CONCLUSIONS
The findings demonstrate considerable potential for improved prognostic modelling by incorporation of biological variables into risk prediction. In particular, the ability to identify a low-risk group with minimal risk of recurrence is likely to have clinical appeal. With larger data sets and longer follow-up, this modelling approach has the potential to enhance an understanding of the interplay of biological characteristics, treatment and cancer recurrence.
Baneshi
M R
MR
Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Warner
P
P
Anderson
N
N
Edwards
J
J
Cooke
T G
TG
Bartlett
J M S
JM
D014408:Biomarkers, Tumor / Q000032:analysis*; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism* / Q000473:pathology*; D019008:Drug Resistance, Neoplasm / Q000235:genetics; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D053208:Kaplan-Meier Estimate; D015233:Models, Statistical; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism* / Q000473:pathology; D011379:Prognosis; D012307:Risk Factors; D020845:Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators / Q000627:therapeutic use; D013629:Tamoxifen / Q000627:therapeutic use
D014408:Biomarkers, Tumor; D020845:Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators; D013629:Tamoxifen
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Mar;11(3):266-74
20079691
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Jun;103(2):149-60
17039263
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 1999 Aug;31(3):209-23
10532196
J Pathol. 2005 Oct;207(2):139-46
16088978
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Oct 1;25(28):4423-30
17906205
J Pathol. 2006 Nov;210(3):358-62
16981252
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Oct 1;99(20):12963-8
12297621
Clin Cancer Res. 2005 Jul 1;11(13):4835-42
16000581
Am J Clin Pathol. 2008 May;129(5):735-43
18426733
Cancer Res. 2006 Jun 15;66(12):6412-20
16778220
Br J Cancer. 2009 Sep 15;101(6):875-8
19672259
N Engl J Med. 2004 Dec 30;351(27):2817-26
15591335
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1994;32(3):281-90
7865856
Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8(2):R19
16606438
Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Feb 15;15(4):1487-95
19228750
Lancet. 2009 May 16;373(9676):1681-92
19447249
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Apr;102(2):173-9
17004114
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Nov 1;26(31):5027-35
18768436
J Clin Pathol. 1995 Nov;48(11):981-3
8543641
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Feb 10;26(5):736-44
18258981
Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Mar 1;13(5):1405-11
17332282
Stat Med. 2008 Jan 30;27(2):157-72; discussion 207-12
17569110
Lancet. 2005 May 14-20;365(9472):1687-717
15894097
Nature. 2000 Aug 17;406(6797):747-52
10963602
Br J Cancer. 1982 Mar;45(3):361-6
7073932
Histopathology. 2006 Jun;48(7):787-94
16722926
Cancer. 1993 Mar 15;71(6 Suppl):2157-62
8443766
Stat Med. 1992 Dec;11(16):2093-109
1293671
Stat Med. 1996 Feb 28;15(4):361-87
8668867
J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Dec;48(12):1503-10
8543964
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jul 1;24(19):3039-47
16809728
N Engl J Med. 2007 Oct 11;357(15):1496-506
17928597
Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Mar;8(1):3-15
10347857