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
4616 - Alpelisib (ALP) + Endocrine Therapy (ET) by Last Prior Therapy in Patients (pts) With PIK3CA-Mutated Hormone-Receptor Positive (HR+) Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2-Negative (HER2–) Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC): Additional Study Cohort in BYLieve
Presenter: Eva Ciruelos
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3592 - PRECYCLE: Impact of CANKADO-based eHealth-support on quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients treated with palbociclib and endocrine therapy.
Presenter: Tom Degenhardt
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4168 - Efficacy and safety of oral poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor fluzoparib in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations and platinum sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer
Presenter: Ning Li
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2785 - Effect of response to last platinum-based chemotherapy in patients (pts) with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma in the phase 3 study ARIEL3 of rucaparib maintenance treatment
Presenter: Jonathan Ledermann
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3496 - Integrated safety analysis of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib in patients (pts) with ovarian cancer in the treatment and maintenance settings
Presenter: Rebecca Kristeleit
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2844 - Clinical factors associated with prolonged response and survival under olaparib as maintenance therapy in BRCA mutated ovarian cancers
Presenter: S.Intidhar Labidi-Galy
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1955 - A Prospective Evaluation of Tolerability of Niraparib Dosing Based on Baseline Body Weight (BW) and Platelet (plt) Count: Blinded Pooled Interim Safety Data from the NORA Study
Presenter: Xiaohua Wu
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2539 - Evaluation of Niraparib 200 mg/d as Maintenance Therapy in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer and Associated Thrombocytopenia in a Real-World US Setting
Presenter: Premal Thaker
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1290 - Niraparib initial dose and its’ management in patients with recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer.
Presenter: Jacek Grabowski
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3353 - Results of the 3rd interim analysis of C-Patrol: A non-interventional study on olaparib in German routine clinical practice
Presenter: Jalid Sehouli
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract