West German Study Group Phase III PlanB Trial: First Prospective Outcome Data for the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay and Concordance of Prognostic Markers by Central and Local Pathology Assessment.

PURPOSE The 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay is a validated prognostic/predictive tool in early hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (BC); however, only a few prospective outcome results have been available so far. In the phase III PlanB trial, RS was prospectively used to define a subset of patients who received only endocrine therapy. We present 3-year outcome data and concordance analysis (among biomarkers/RS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Central tumor bank was established prospectively from PlanB (intermediate and high-risk, locally human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative BC). After an early amendment, HR-positive, pN0-1 patients with RS ≤ 11 were recommended to omit chemotherapy. RESULTS From 2009 to 2011, PlanB enrolled 3,198 patients with a median age of 56 years; 41.1% had node-positive and 32.5% grade 3 disease. In 348 patients (15.3%), chemotherapy was omitted based on RS ≤ 11. After 35 months median follow-up, 3-year disease-free survival in patients with RS ≤ 11 and endocrine therapy alone was 98% versus 92% and 98% in RS > 25 and RS 12 to 25 in chemotherapy-treated patients, respectively. Nodal status, central and local grade, the Ki-67 protein encoded by the MKI67 gene, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, tumor size, and RS were univariate prognostic factors for disease-free survival; only nodal status, both central and local grade, and RS were independent multivariate factors. Histologic grade was discordant between central and local laboratories in 44%. RS was positively but moderately correlated with the Ki-67 protein encoded by the MKI67 gene and grade and negatively correlated with progesterone receptor and estrogen receptor. CONCLUSION In this prospective trial, patients with enhanced clinical risk and omitted chemotherapy on the basis of RS ≤ 11 had excellent 3-year survival. The substantial discordance observed between traditional prognostic markers and RS emphasizes the need for standardized assessment and supports the potential integration of standardized, well-validated genomic assays such as RS with clinicopathologic prognostic factors for chemotherapy indication in early hormone receptor-positive BC.

[1]  Virginia G Kaklamani,et al.  Prospective Validation of a 21-Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  R. Gelber,et al.  Tailoring therapies—improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015 , 2015, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[3]  F. André,et al.  Ki67—no evidence for its use in node-positive breast cancer , 2015, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[4]  D. Wallwiener,et al.  Final analysis of the prospective WSG-AGO EC-Doc versus FEC phase III trial in intermediate-risk (pN1) early breast cancer: efficacy and predictive value of Ki67 expression. , 2014, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[5]  Gideon Blumenthal,et al.  Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis , 2014, The Lancet.

[6]  S. Shak,et al.  Prediction of recurrence with the Oncotype DX recurrence score in node-positive, HR-positive, breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy: Results from PACS01 trial. , 2014 .

[7]  B. Ljung,et al.  Breast cancer version 3.2014. , 2014, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[8]  E. Perez,et al.  Central pathology laboratory review of HER2 and ER in early breast cancer: an ALTTO trial [BIG 2-06/NCCTG N063D (Alliance)] ring study , 2014, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[9]  John M S Bartlett,et al.  An international Ki67 reproducibility study. , 2013, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  N. Harbeck,et al.  Genomic Profiling in Luminal Breast Cancer , 2013, Breast Care.

[11]  N. Harbeck,et al.  WSG ADAPT – adjuvant dynamic marker-adjusted personalized therapy trial optimizing risk assessment and therapy response prediction in early breast cancer: study protocol for a prospective, multi-center, controlled, non-blinded, randomized, investigator initiated phase II/III trial , 2013, Trials.

[12]  C. Perou,et al.  Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013 , 2013, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[13]  B. Ljung,et al.  Breast Cancer, Version 3.2013 , 2013 .

[14]  N. Harbeck,et al.  The prognostic and predictive impact of genomic grade index (GGI) versus central grade or molecular class in intermediate-risk breast cancer (BC): Results from the EC-Doc trial. , 2013 .

[15]  E. Perez,et al.  Immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization assessment of HER2 in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer (NCCTG N9831, BCIRG 006, and BCIRG 005) , 2013, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[16]  C. Perou,et al.  Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer. , 2013, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  A. Sahin Impact of routine pathology review on treatment for node-negative breast cancer: Kennecke HF, Speers CH, Ennis CA, et al (British Columbia Cancer Agency, Canada) J Clin Oncol 30:2227-2231, 2012 , 2013 .

[18]  Catherine A. Ennis,et al.  Impact of routine pathology review on treatment for node-negative breast cancer. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  F. Markowetz,et al.  The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups , 2012, Nature.

[20]  B. A. Carter,et al.  Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: Recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group , 2012 .

[21]  Jack Cuzick,et al.  Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. , 2011, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[22]  Pierre-Marie Martin,et al.  Ki-67: level of evidence and methodological considerations for its role in the clinical management of breast cancer: analytical and critical review , 2011, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[23]  T. Yamanaka,et al.  Clinical significance of the 21‐gene signature (Oncotype DX) in hormone receptor‐positive early stage primary breast cancer in the Japanese population , 2010, Cancer.

[24]  Jack Cuzick,et al.  Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  The impact of inter-observer variation in pathological assessment of node-negative breast cancer on clinical risk assessment and patient selection for adjuvant systemic treatment. , 2010, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[26]  Robert B Livingston,et al.  Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[27]  Edith A Perez,et al.  Estrogen- and progesterone-receptor status in ECOG 2197: comparison of immunohistochemistry by local and central laboratories and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction by central laboratory. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[28]  M. Gilcrease,et al.  Ki-67 as Prognostic Marker in Early Breast Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Published Studies Involving 12 155 Patients , 2008 .

[29]  R. Venkatraman HER2 status and efficacy of adjuvant anthracyclines in early breast cancer: A pooled analysis of randomized trials , 2008 .

[30]  R. Gelber,et al.  Predictive value of tumor Ki-67 expression in two randomized trials of adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for node-negative breast cancer. , 2008, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[31]  M. Cronin,et al.  Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[32]  S. Shak,et al.  A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients , 2006, Breast Cancer Research.

[33]  M. Cronin,et al.  A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  Christian A. Rees,et al.  Molecular portraits of human breast tumours , 2000, Nature.