Validation of the online prediction model CancerMath in the Dutch breast cancer population

Insights into the performance of PREDICT tool in a large Mainland Chinese breast cancer cohort: a comparative analysis of versions 3.0 and 2.2

BACKGROUND

PREDICT is a web-based tool for forecasting breast cancer outcomes. PREDICT version 3.0 was recently released. This study aimed to validate this tool for a large population in mainland China and compare v3.0 with v2.2.

METHODS

Women who underwent surgery for nonmetastatic primary invasive breast cancer between 2010 and 2020 from the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University were selected. Predicted and observed 5-year overall survival (OS) for both v3.0 and v2.2 were compared. Discrimination was compared using receiver-operator curves and DeLong test. Calibration was evaluated using calibration plots and chi-squared test. A difference greater than 5% was deemed clinically relevant.

RESULTS

A total of 5424 patients were included, with median follow-up time of 58 months (IQR 38-89 months). Compared to v2.2, v3.0 did not show improved discriminatory accuracy for 5-year OS (AUC: 0.756 vs 0.771), same as ER-positive and ER-negative patients. However, calibration was significantly improved in v3.0, with predicted 5-year OS deviated from observed by -2.0% for the entire cohort, -2.9% for ER-positive and -0.0% for ER-negative patients, compared to -7.3%, -4.7% and -13.7% in v2.2. In v3.0, 5-year OS was underestimated by 9.0% for patients older than 75 years, and 5.8% for patients with micrometastases. Patients with distant metastases postdiagnosis was overestimated by 10.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

PREDICT v3.0 reliably predicts 5-year OS for the majority of Chinese patients with breast cancer. PREDICT v3.0 significantly improved the predictive accuracy for ER-negative groups. Furthermore, caution is advised when interpreting 5-year OS for patients aged over 70, those with micrometastases or metastases postdiagnosis.

Gene expression profiles in clinically T1-2N0 ER+HER2- breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving therapy: their added value in case sentinel lymph node biopsy is not performed

PURPOSE

Omitting sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in breast cancer treatment results in patients with unknown positive nodal status and potential risk for systemic undertreatment. This study aimed to investigate whether gene expression profiles (GEPs) can lower this risk in cT1-2N0 ER+ HER2- breast cancer patients treated with BCT.

METHODS

Patients were included if diagnosed between 2011 and 2017 with cT1-2N0 ER+ HER2- breast cancer, treated with BCT and SLNB, and in whom GEP was applied. Adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations based on clinical risk status (Dutch breast cancer guideline of 2020 versus PREDICT v2.1) with and without knowledge on SLNB outcome were compared to GEP outcome. We examined missing adjuvant chemotherapy indications, and the number of GEPs needed to identify one patient at risk for systemic undertreatment.

RESULTS

Of 3585 patients, 2863 (79.9%) had pN0 and 722 (20.1%) pN + disease. Chemotherapy was recommended in 1354 (37.8% guideline-2020) and 1888 patients (52.7% PREDICT). Eliminating SLNB outcome (n = 722) resulted in omission of chemotherapy recommendation in 475 (35.1% guideline-2020) and 412 patients (21.8% PREDICT). GEP revealed genomic high risk in 126 (26.5% guideline-2020) and 82 patients (19.9% PREDICT) in case of omitted chemotherapy recommendation in the absence of SLNB. Extrapolated to the whole group, this concerns 3.5% and 2.3%, respectively, resulting in the need for 28-44 GEPs to identify one patient at risk for systemic undertreatment.

CONCLUSION

If no SLNB is performed, clinical risk status according to the guideline of 2020 and PREDICT predicts a very low risk for systemic undertreatment. The number of GEPs needed to identify one patient at risk for undertreatment does not justify its standard use.

Theory and Practice of Integrating Machine Learning and Conventional Statistics in Medical Data Analysis

The practice of medical decision making is changing rapidly with the development of innovative computing technologies. The growing interest of data analysis with improvements in big data computer processing methods raises the question of whether machine learning can be integrated with conventional statistics in health research. To help address this knowledge gap, this paper presents a review on the conceptual integration between conventional statistics and machine learning, focusing on the health research. The similarities and differences between the two are compared using mathematical concepts and algorithms. The comparison between conventional statistics and machine learning methods indicates that conventional statistics are the fundamental basis of machine learning, where the black box algorithms are derived from basic mathematics, but are advanced in terms of automated analysis, handling big data and providing interactive visualizations. While the nature of both these methods are different, they are conceptually similar. Based on our review, we conclude that conventional statistics and machine learning are best to be integrated to develop automated data analysis tools. We also strongly believe that machine learning could be explored by health researchers to enhance conventional statistics in decision making for added reliable validation measures.

A scoping review of interactive and personalized web-based clinical tools to support treatment decision making in breast cancer

The increasing attention on personalized breast cancer care has resulted in an explosion of new interactive, tailored, web-based clinical decision tools for guiding treatment decisions in clinical practice. The goal of this study was to review, compare, and discuss the clinical implications of current tools, and highlight future directions for tools aiming to improve personalized breast cancer care. We searched PubMed, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify web-based decision tools addressing breast cancer treatment decisions. There was a total of 17 articles associated with 21 unique tools supporting decisions related to surgery, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, bisphosphonates, HER2-targeted therapy, and chemotherapy. The quality of the tools was assessed using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard instrument. Overall, the tools considered clinical (e.g., age) and tumor characteristics (e.g., grade) to provide personalized outcomes (e.g., survival) associated with various treatment options. Fewer tools provided the adverse effects of the selected treatment. Only one tool was field-tested with patients, and none were tested with healthcare providers. Future studies need to assess the feasibility, usability, acceptability, as well as the effects of personalized web-based decision tools on communication and decision making from the patient and clinician perspectives.

Predicting of Sentinel Lymph Node Status in Breast Cancer Patients with Clinically Negative Nodes: A Validation Study

Simple Summary

Sentinel lymph node biopsy procedure is time consuming and expensive, but it is still the intra-operative exam capable of the best performance. However, sometimes, surgery is achieved without a clear diagnosis, so clinical decision support systems developed with artificial intelligence techniques are essential to assist current diagnostic procedures. In this work, we evaluated the usefulness of a CancerMath tool in the sentinel lymph nodes positivity prediction for clinically negative patients. We tested it on 993 patients referred to our institute characterized by sentinel lymph node status, tumor size, age, histologic type, grading, expression of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER2, and Ki-67. By training the CancerMath (CM) model on our dataset, we reached a sensitivity value of 72%, whereas the online one was 46%, despite a specificity reduction. It was found the addiction of the prognostic factors Her2 and Ki67 could help improve performances on the classification of particular types of patients.

Abstract

In the absence of lymph node abnormalities detectable on clinical examination or imaging, the guidelines provide for the dissection of the first axillary draining lymph nodes during surgery. It is not always possible to arrive at surgery without diagnostic doubts, and machine learning algorithms can support clinical decisions. The web calculator CancerMath (CM) allows you to estimate the probability of having positive lymph nodes valued on the basis of tumor size, age, histologic type, grading, expression of estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor. We collected 993 patients referred to our institute with clinically negative results characterized by sentinel lymph node status, prognostic factors defined by CM, and also human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and Ki-67. Area Under the Curve (AUC) values obtained by the online CM application were comparable with those obtained after training its algorithm on our database. Nevertheless, by training the CM model on our dataset and using the same feature, we reached a sensitivity median value of 72%, whereas the online one was equal to 46%, despite a specificity reduction. We found that the addition of the prognostic factors Her2 and Ki67 could help improve performances on the classification of particular types of patients with the aim of reducing as much as possible the false positives that lead to axillary dissection. As showed by our experimental results, it is not particularly suitable for use as a support instrument for the prediction of metastatic lymph nodes on clinically negative patients.