Abstract 1312
Background
Predictive online calculators are used by clinicians as decision aids in early breast cancer (EBC). While use statistics for these calculators have not been published, as of 2017 NHS Predict was being accessed more than 20,000 times a month. These predictive tools have not had accuracy & benefit of use prospectively confirmed in EBC, yet use of calculators has been encouraged in EBC guidelines. It is important to understand the populations informing model development & validation, to understand how data bias may impact predictions in under-represented subpopulations. This work sought to elucidate the risk of bias in model development & validation for 3 online EBC calculators (NHS Predict, Adjuvant! & Cancermath), in an effort to highlight sub-populations where calculated risk & therefore treatment benefit estimates may be less reliable.
Methods
A literature search was conducted in PubMed, search terms were “predict*” “adjuvant” “breast” & “algorithm”. Results were screened for relevance to the three predictive tools under scrutiny & additional references were extracted from relevant papers. Using a modified CHARMS checklist, the relevant sections of the development & validation papers were extracted.
Results
6 development & 24 validation papers were reviewed as summarised in the TableTable:
264P
| Predict | Adjuvant | Cancermath | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Development population size & date range | 5694 1977-2008 | 37,968 1977-2007 | 499,724 1977-2007 |
| Aged <35 in development population | 2% (111) | 0 | >0.5% |
| Aged >65 in development population | 32% (1781) | 0 | >17% |
| Tumour size >5cm in development population | 5% (287) | 0 | 0 |
| Number of validation studies | 10 | 13 | 3 |
| % retrospective | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Total number of patients in validation studies | 19,864 | 19,618 | 11,203 |
| Age >65 in validations | 35% (7134) | 42% (8313) | 40% (4519) |
| Age <35 in validations | 16% (3235) | 8% (1518) | 9% (1007) |
| Tumour size >5cm in validations | 5% (287) | 5% (1015) | 6% (634) |
| Universal exclusions | Multi-focal, inflammatory, male | Multi-focal, inflammatory, male | Multi-focal, inflammatory, male |
| Neoadjuvant chemotherapy not an exclusion | 1 study (121 patients) | 0 | 0 |
| Overall conclusions of validation authors | Earlier versions under-predicted mortality in women <35 Poor performance in tumours >5cm. | Poor performance in general in: <35 and >65 More advanced disease Malay ethnicity Overly optimistic survival predictions across subgroups in UK population. | Poor performance in < 35 Systematically under-predicted mortality, especially for ER-negative tumours. |
Conclusions
All 3 predictive tools have under-represented groups in their development cohorts, specifically those under 35 & over 65 years old, as well as larger tumours. Validation studies consistently demonstrate worse performance in these groups. However, due to inconsistent methodology in validation studies, quantitating the summary performance within & across tools is difficult. These predictive tools should be used with caution in under-represented populations. More work is required to look at clinical utility of tools as well as their statistical performance.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
2551 - Efficacy of dose-dense (DD) adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) in hormone receptor positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer (BC) patients (pts) according to immunohistochemically (IHC) defined luminal subtypes: an exploratory analysis of the GIM2 trial.
Presenter: Benedetta Conte
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3426 - High dose Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in Triple-Negative breast cancer with evidence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD).
Presenter: Sonja Vliek
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3792 - Risk factors for locoregional recurrence (LRR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: pooled analysis of prospective neoadjuvant breast cancer (BC) trials
Presenter: Gustavo Werutsky
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4044 - Estimating radiotherapy-induced cardiovascular mortality in female breast cancer patients.
Presenter: Mark De Ridder
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
719 - 3-year follow-up of a phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab and its biosimilar CT-P6 in HER2 positive early breast cancer (EBC)
Presenter: Justin Stebbing
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3595 - Adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly breast cancer patients: pattern of use and impact on overall survival
Presenter: Axel Berthelot
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3992 - Carboplatin-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC): a propensity score-matched study.
Presenter: Maria Vittoria Dieci
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3477 - Impact of adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) on incidence of metastatic breast cancer (mBC): an epidemiological model of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) who did not achieve pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant treatment (non-pCR)
Presenter: Mellissa Williamson
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3928 - Chemotherapy (CT)-induced anaemia in patients (pts) treated with dose-dense regimen: Results of the prospectively randomised anaemia substudy from the neoadjuvant GeparOcto study
Presenter: Hans Tesch
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2184 - The clinical impact of adjuvant dose-dense sequential chemotherapy (dds-CT) in patients with high-risk operable breast cancer (BC); pooled analysis of 6 clinical trials.
Presenter: Elena Fountzilas
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract