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
4401 - Real-world effectiveness of first-line palbociclib + letrozole for metastatic breast cancer 4 years post approval in the US
Presenter: Jonathan Kish
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5876 - Palbociclib-Fulvestrant (PALBO-FUL) and Everolimus -Exemestane (EVE-EXE) for Second line Hormonal Treatment (HT) of Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) with Lobular Histology: a Propensity Score Matched Analysis of a Multicenter ‘Real-World’ Patients (pts) Series.
Presenter: Armando Orlandi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3587 - Dose-escalation study of G1T48, an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), in postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (ABC)
Presenter: E Dees
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5696 - Final results of the STEM trial: SFX-01 in the Treatment and Evaluation of ER+ Her2- Metastatic breast cancer (mBC)
Presenter: Sacha Howell
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1475 - Alpelisib (ALP) + Fulvestrant (FUL) in Hormone-Receptor Positive (HR+), Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2–Negative (HER2–) Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC): Subgroup Analysis by Presence of Visceral Metastasis (VM) in the SOLAR-1 Trial
Presenter: Mario Campone
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2549 - Phase 1 Dose Escalation Study of a Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator RAD140 in Estrogen Receptor Positive (ER+), HER2 Negative (HER2-) Breast Cancer (BC)
Presenter: Erika Hamilton
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3787 - A Phase I study of XZP-3287, a novel oral CDK4/6 Inhibitor, administered on a continuous dosing schedule, in patients with advanced solid tumours
Presenter: Binghe Xu
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4835 - Phase-I dose-escalation and expansion study of the PARP inhibitor, fluzoparib (SHR3162), in patients with advanced solid tumors
Presenter: Huiping Li
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5083 - Phase 2 study of DHP107 (Liporaxel®, oral paclitaxel) in first-line, HER2 negative recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (OPTIMAL study, NCT03315364)
Presenter: Jin-Hee Ahn
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2674 - Multicenter Phase I Trial of Trastuzumab Emtansine (T-DM1) in Combination with Non-Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (NPLD) in HER2[+] Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC). THELMA Study
Presenter: Elena López-Miranda
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract