Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND A 70-gene signature was previously shown to have prognostic value in patients with node-negative breast cancer. Our goal was to validate the signature in an independent group of patients. METHODS Patients (n = 307, with 137 events after a median follow-up of 13.6 years) from five European centers were divided into high- and low-risk groups based on the gene signature classification and on clinical risk classifications. Patients were assigned to the gene signature low-risk group if their 5-year distant metastasis-free survival probability as estimated by the gene signature was greater than 90%. Patients were assigned to the clinicopathologic low-risk group if their 10-year survival probability, as estimated by Adjuvant! software, was greater than 88% (for estrogen receptor [ER]-positive patients) or 92% (for ER-negative patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated to compare time to distant metastases, disease-free survival, and overall survival in high- versus low-risk groups. RESULTS The 70-gene signature outperformed the clinicopathologic risk assessment in predicting all endpoints. For time to distant metastases, the gene signature yielded HR = 2.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35 to 4.00) without adjustment for clinical risk and hazard ratios ranging from 2.13 to 2.15 after adjustment for various estimates of clinical risk; clinicopathologic risk using Adjuvant! software yielded an unadjusted HR = 1.68 (95% CI = 0.92 to 3.07). For overall survival, the gene signature yielded an unadjusted HR = 2.79 (95% CI = 1.60 to 4.87) and adjusted hazard ratios ranging from 2.63 to 2.89; clinicopathologic risk yielded an unadjusted HR = 1.67 (95% CI = 0.93 to 2.98). For patients in the gene signature high-risk group, 10-year overall survival was 0.69 for patients in both the low- and high-clinical risk groups; for patients in the gene signature low-risk group, the 10-year survival rates were 0.88 and 0.89, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The 70-gene signature adds independent prognostic information to clinicopathologic risk assessment for patients with early breast cancer.

[1]  I. O. Ellis,et al.  Confirmation of a prognostic index in primary breast cancer. , 1987, British Journal of Cancer.

[2]  C K Osborne,et al.  Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  T. Lumley,et al.  Time‐Dependent ROC Curves for Censored Survival Data and a Diagnostic Marker , 2000, Biometrics.

[4]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  M Markman,et al.  National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, November 1-3, 2000. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  P. Ravdin,et al.  Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  R. Spang,et al.  Predicting the clinical status of human breast cancer by using gene expression profiles , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  Yudong D. He,et al.  Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer , 2002, Nature.

[9]  Donald L Weaver,et al.  Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  Yudong D. He,et al.  A Gene-Expression Signature as a Predictor of Survival in Breast Cancer , 2002 .

[11]  I. Ellis,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. , 2002, Histopathology.

[12]  Van,et al.  A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  M. West,et al.  Gene expression predictors of breast cancer outcomes , 2003, The Lancet.

[14]  Philip M. Long,et al.  Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Annuska M Glas,et al.  Gene expression profiles of primary breast tumors maintained in distant metastases , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Michael W Kattan,et al.  Judging new markers by their ability to improve predictive accuracy. , 2003, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[17]  M. Radmacher,et al.  Pitfalls in the use of DNA microarray data for diagnostic and prognostic classification. , 2003, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[18]  Fatima Cardoso,et al.  Microarray technology and its effect on breast cancer (re)classification and prediction of outcome , 2003, Breast Cancer Research.

[19]  R. Gelber,et al.  Meeting highlights: updated international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  D. Ransohoff.  Rules of evidence for cancer molecular-marker discovery and validation , 2004, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[21]  M. Fernö,et al.  "Good Old" clinical markers have similar power in breast cancer prognosis as microarray gene expression profilers. , 2004, European journal of cancer.

[22]  Stefan Michiels,et al.  Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: a multiple random validation strategy , 2005, The Lancet.

[23]  R. Gelber,et al.  Meeting highlights: international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2005. , 2005, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[24]  Karen A Gelmon,et al.  Population-based validation of the prognostic model ADJUVANT! for early breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  Richard Simon,et al.  Roadmap for developing and validating therapeutically relevant genomic classifiers. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[26]  Tor-Kristian Jenssen,et al.  Gene-expression profiling in breast cancer , 2005, The Lancet.

[27]  Y Wang,et al.  Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials , 2005, The Lancet.

[28]  J. Foekens,et al.  Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer , 2005, The Lancet.

[29]  G. Getz,et al.  Outcome signature genes in breast cancer: is there a unique set? , 2005, Breast Cancer Research.

[30]  Marc Buyse,et al.  Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial , 2006, Nature Clinical Practice Oncology.

[31]  J. Foekens,et al.  Multicenter validation of a gene expression-based prognostic signature in lymph node-negative primary breast cancer. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.