Clinical Utility of Genomic Recurrence Risk Stratification in Early, Hormone-Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Breast Cancer: Real-World Experience.

BACKGROUND RNA-based genomic risk assessment estimates chemotherapy benefit in patients with hormone-receptor positive (HR+)/Human Epidermal Growth Factor 2-negative (ERBB2-) breast cancer (BC). It is virtually used in all patients with early HR+/ERBB2- BC regardless of clinical recurrence risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult patients with early-stage (T1-3; N0; M0) HR+/ERBB2- BC who underwent genomic testing using the Oncotype DX (Exact Sciences) 21-genes assay. Clinicopathologic features were collected to assess the clinical recurrence risk, in terms of clinical risk score (CRS) and using a composite risk score of distant recurrence Regan Risk Score (RRS). CRS and RRS were compared to the genomic risk of recurrence (GRS). RESULTS Between January 2015 and December 2020, 517 patients with early-stage disease underwent genomic testing, and clinical data was available for 501 of them. There was statistically significant concordance between the 3 prognostication methods (P < 0.01). Within patients with low CRS (n = 349), 9.17% had a high GRS, compared to 8.93% in patients with low RRS (n = 280). In patients with grade 1 histology (n = 130), 3.85% had a high GRS and 68.46% had tumors > 1 cm, of whom only 4.49% had a high GRS. Tumor size > 1cm did not associate with a high GRS. CONCLUSION Genomic testing for patients with grade 1 tumors may be safely omitted, irrespective of size. Our finds call for a better understanding of the need for routine genomic testing in patients with low grade/low clinical risk of recurrence.

[1]  R. Gelber,et al.  Absolute Improvements in Freedom From Distant Recurrence to Tailor Adjuvant Endocrine Therapies for Premenopausal Women: Results From TEXT and SOFT , 2019, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[2]  R. Heidel,et al.  Nomogram update based on TAILORx clinical trial results - Oncotype DX breast cancer recurrence score can be predicted using clinicopathologic data. , 2019, Breast.

[3]  A. Batra,et al.  Oncotype DX: Where Does It Stand in India? , 2019, Journal of global oncology.

[4]  M. Özdoğan,et al.  Cost effectiveness of Gene Expression Profiling in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer in a Middle-Income Country, Turkey: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Study. , 2019, European journal of breast health.

[5]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries , 2018, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[6]  Virginia G Kaklamani,et al.  Adjuvant Chemotherapy Guided by a 21‐Gene Expression Assay in Breast Cancer , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Yihong Wang,et al.  Relationship of histologic grade and histologic subtype with oncotype Dx recurrence score; retrospective review of 863 breast cancer oncotype Dx results , 2018, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[8]  Daniel F. Hayes,et al.  20‐Year Risks of Breast‐Cancer Recurrence after Stopping Endocrine Therapy at 5 Years , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  K. Hunt,et al.  Incorporating Tumor Characteristics to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Breast Cancer Staging System. , 2017, The oncologist.

[10]  Ian Krop,et al.  Use of Biomarkers to Guide Decisions on Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Women With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  R. Heidel,et al.  Oncotype DX breast cancer recurrence score can be predicted with a novel nomogram using clinicopathologic data , 2017, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[12]  S. Shak,et al.  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. , 2016, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  R. Bast,et al.  Use of Biomarkers to Guide Decisions on Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Women With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. , 2016, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

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

[15]  Kathleen A Cronin,et al.  US incidence of breast cancer subtypes defined by joint hormone receptor and HER2 status. , 2014, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[16]  J. Forbes,et al.  Which patients benefit most from adjuvant aromatase inhibitors? Results using a composite measure of prognostic risk in the BIG 1-98 randomized trial. , 2011, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[17]  J. Hornberger,et al.  Impact of a 21‐gene RT‐PCR assay on treatment decisions in early‐stage breast cancer , 2007, Cancer.

[18]  H. Linden,et al.  The cost of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early‐stage breast carcinoma , 2005, Cancer.

[19]  Gary H Lyman,et al.  Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer. , 2005, The American journal of managed care.

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

[21]  S. Edge,et al.  The effects of oncotype DX recurrence scores on chemotherapy utilization in a multi-institutional breast cancer cohort , 2010, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.