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
5793 - Real world treatment sequencing patterns in secondary breast cancer (SBC): Pathway visualisation using national datasets.
Presenter: Ashley Horne
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3185 - Utilization Pattern of Bone Targeting Agents in Patients with Solid Tumor in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Korea
Presenter: Shi Jie Lai
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3705 - Clinico-pathological Features and Prognosis of Patients with Pregnancy Associated Breast Cancer – A Matched Case Control Study
Presenter: Ruyan Zhang
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1421 - TRYbeCA-2: A Randomized Phase 2/3 Study of Eryaspase in Combination with Gemcitabine and Carboplatin Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy Alone As First-Line Treatment in Patients with Metastatic or Locally Recurrent Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Presenter: Ahmad Awada
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4119 - CONTESSA TRIO: A Multinational, Multicenter, Phase 2 Study of Tesetaxel plus 3 Different PD-(L)1 Inhibitors in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) and Tesetaxel Monotherapy in Elderly Patients with HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC)
Presenter: Sara Tolaney
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4545 - Bintrafusp alfa (M7824) and Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Metastatic Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)(NCT03579472)
Presenter: Jennifer Litton
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3340 - Effectiveness of Olaparib Plus Trastuzumab in HER2[+], BRCA–mutated (BRCAm) or Homologous Recombination Deficient (HRD) Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC) patients (pts). The OPHELIA Study
Presenter: José Enrique Alés-Martínez
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1113 - RIBOB : A Study on the efficacy and safety of Ribociclib in combination with letrozole in Older women (≥70 years) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced Breast cancer (aBC) with no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease
Presenter: Cindy Kenis
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4025 - RIbociclib plus Goserelin with Hormonal Therapy versus physician Choice chemotherapy in premenopausal or perimenopausal patients with HR+, HER2– inoperable locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer – RIGHT Choice study
Presenter: Nagi El Saghir
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3516 - Palbociclib Rechallenge in Hormone Receptor (HR)[+]/HER2[-] Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC). PALMIRA Trial
Presenter: Antonio Llombart Cussac
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract