Abstract 276P
Background
In HoR-positive/HER2-negative EBC pCR rates are low and ML algorithms could help to predict pCR using clinical and pathological characteristics.
Methods
Patients with EBC receiving NCT followed by surgery were included in the training/validation cohorts (TC/VC). pCR was defined as absence of residual invasive cancer on pathologic breast specimen and lymph nodes (ypT0/is ypN0). Eight ML models (c5.0, k-nearest neighbour, random forest [RF], neural network, support vector machine [linear/radial], boosted trees and boosted logistic regression) were trained and tuned. A stratified ten-fold cross-validation was used and models’ performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operation characteristics curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity.
Results
572 patients were included in the TC and 87 achieved pCR (15%, 95% CI 12-18%). Ten variables (menopausal status, age, histology, grade, clinical T/N, ER/PgR, Ki67 and HER2 [zero/low]) were included according to multivariate analysis and clinical relevance. The RF algorithm had the best performance: AUC 0.77, 95% CI 0.71-0.83; sensitivity 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.88) and specificity 0.56 (95% CI 0.46-0.66). Variables with the highest importance were Ki67, ER/PgR status, age and nodal status. 293 patients were included in the VC and 24 achieved pCR (8%, 95% CI 6-12%). The RF algorithm had an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI 0.61-0.81), sensitivity of 0.29 (95% CI 0.13-0.51) and specificity of 0.90 (95% CI 0.86-0.94). With a median follow-up of 53.3 and 57.7 months for DFS and OS, patients whose pCR was predicted by the model had longer DFS (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.83, p=0.003) and OS (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29-0.79, p=0.001). A one percentage increase in the probability of predicted pCR was significantly associated with longer DFS (HR 0.992; 95% CI 0.986-0.999, p=0.02) and OS (HR 0.992, 95% CI 0.985-0.998, p=0.01).
Conclusions
The ML algorithm has the potential to predict pCR in HoR-positive/HER2-negative patients undergoing NCT, thus supporting clinicians to individualize treatment for EBC.
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
304P - Generalizability of 313-SNP PRS for breast cancer risk in non-European ancestries
Presenter: Helen Shang
Session: Poster session 02
305P - Prognostic implications of HER2 changes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with HER2-zero and HER2-low breast cancer
Presenter: Sora Kang
Session: Poster session 02
307P - Identifying new biological subgroups of triple-negative breast cancer using next-generation integrative clustering pipeline
Presenter: Xixuan Zhu
Session: Poster session 02
308P - Regression-based deep-learning predicts breast cancer recurrence risk score from pathology slides
Presenter: Omar El Nahhas
Session: Poster session 02
310P - Longitudinal evaluation of circulating tumour DNA in early breast cancer using a plasma-only methylation-based assay
Presenter: Mitchell Elliott
Session: Poster session 02
311P - Multinational survey study assessing genetic testing and counselling among patients (pts) with breast cancer (MAGENTA): Results on the genetic counselling experience
Presenter: Ranjit Kaur
Session: Poster session 02
312P - Prediction model of breast cancer patient’s neoadjuvant treatment outcome using breast cancer organoids cultured from core needle biopsies
Presenter: Dong Woo Lee
Session: Poster session 02
313P - Intrinsic subtypes in a cohort of early breast cancer patients
Presenter: Theresa Bracht
Session: Poster session 02