EMDR v. other psychological therapies for PTSD: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) examined the overall effectiveness of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) in reducing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, achieving response and remission, and reducing treatment dropout among adults with PTSD compared to other psychological treatments. Additionally, we examined available participant-level moderators of the efficacy of EMDR.

METHODS

This study included randomized controlled trials. Eligible studies were identified by a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, PsyclNFO, PTSDpubs, and CENTRAL. The target population was adults with above-threshold baseline PTSD symptoms. Trials were eligible if at least 70% of study participants had been diagnosed with PTSD using a structured clinical interview. Primary outcomes included PTSD symptom severity, treatment response, and PTSD remission. Treatment dropout was a secondary outcome. The systematic search retrieved 15 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 8 of these 15 were able to be included in this IPDMA (346 patients). Comparator treatments included relaxation therapy, emotional freedom technique, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral psychotherapies, and REM-desensitization.

RESULTS

One-stage IPDMA found no significant difference between EMDR and other psychological treatments in reducing PTSD symptom severity (β = -0.24), achieving response (β = 0.86), attaining remission (β = 1.05), or reducing treatment dropout rates (β = -0.25). Moderator analyses found unemployed participants receiving EMDR had higher PTSD symptom severity at the post-test, and males were more likely to drop out of EMDR treatment than females.

CONCLUSION

The current study found no significant difference between EMDR and other psychological treatments. We found some indication of the moderating effects of gender and employment status.

Coping with COVID: risk and resilience factors for mental health in a German representative panel study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might affect mental health. Data from population-representative panel surveys with multiple waves including pre-COVID data investigating risk and protective factors are still rare.

METHODS

In a stratified random sample of the German household population (n = 6684), we conducted survey-weighted multiple linear regressions to determine the association of various psychological risk and protective factors assessed between 2015 and 2020 with changes in psychological distress [(PD; measured via Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4)] from pre-pandemic (average of 2016 and 2019) to peri-pandemic (both 2020 and 2021) time points. Control analyses on PD change between two pre-pandemic time points (2016 and 2019) were conducted. Regularized regressions were computed to inform on which factors were statistically most influential in the multicollinear setting.

RESULTS

PHQ-4 scores in 2020 (M = 2.45) and 2021 (M = 2.21) were elevated compared to 2019 (M = 1.79). Several risk factors (catastrophizing, neuroticism, and asking for instrumental support) and protective factors (perceived stress recovery, positive reappraisal, and optimism) were identified for the peri-pandemic outcomes. Control analyses revealed that in pre-pandemic times, neuroticism and optimism were predominantly related to PD changes. Regularized regression mostly confirmed the results and highlighted perceived stress recovery as most consistent influential protective factor across peri-pandemic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several psychological risk and protective factors related to PD outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparison of pre-pandemic data stresses the relevance of longitudinal assessments to potentially reconcile contradictory findings. Implications and suggestions for targeted prevention and intervention programs during highly stressful times such as pandemics are discussed.

Are we equally at risk of changing smoking behavior during a public health crisis? Impact of educational level on smoking from the TEMPO cohort

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic as a public health crisis has led to a significant increase in mental health difficulties. Smoking is strongly associated with mental health conditions, which is why the pandemic might have influenced the otherwise decline in smoking rates. Persons belonging to socioeconomically disadvantaged groups may be particularly affected, both because the pandemic has exacerbated existing social inequalities and because this group was more likely to smoke before the pandemic. We examined smoking prevalence in a French cohort study, focusing on differences between educational attainment. In addition, we examined the association between interpersonal changes in tobacco consumption and educational level from 2018 to 2021.

METHODS

Using four assessments of smoking status available from 2009 to 2021, we estimated smoking prevalence over time, stratified by highest educational level in the TEMPO cohort and the difference was tested using chi² test. We studied the association between interpersonal change in smoking status between 2018 and 2021 and educational attainment among 148 smokers, using multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Smoking prevalence was higher among those with low education. The difference between the two groups increased from 2020 to 2021 (4.8-9.4%, p < 0.001). Smokers with high educational level were more likely to decrease their tobacco consumption from 2018 to 2021 compared to low educated smokers (aOR = 2.72 [1.26;5.89]).

CONCLUSION

Current findings showed a widening of the social inequality gap in relation to smoking rates, underscoring the increased vulnerability of persons with low educational level to smoking and the likely inadequate focus on social inequalities in relation to tobacco control policies during the pandemic.

Views and experiences of migrants and stakeholders involved in social and health care for migrants in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had major and potentially long-lasting effects on mental health and wellbeing across populations worldwide. However, these impacts were not felt equally, leading to an exacerbation of health inequalities, especially affecting vulnerable populations such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Aiming to inform the adaptation and implementation of psychological intervention programmes, the present study investigated priority mental health needs in this population group.

METHODS

Participants were adult asylum seekers, refugees and migrants (ARMs) and stakeholders with experience in the field of migration living in Verona, Italy, and fluent in Italian and English. A two-stage process was carried out to examine their needs using qualitative methods including free listing interviews and focus group discussions, according to Module One of the DIME (Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation) manual. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analyses approach.

RESULTS

A total of 19 participants (12 stakeholders, 7 ARMs) completed the free listing interviews and 20 participants (12 stakeholders and 8 ARMs) attended focus group discussions. Salient problems and functions that emerged during free listing interviews were discussed during the focus group discussions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, ARMs struggled with many everyday living difficulties in their resettlement country due to social and economic issues, revealing a strong influence of contextual factors in determining mental health. Both ARMs and stakeholders highlighted a mismatch between needs, expectations and interventions as factors that may hamper proper implementation of health and social programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings could help in the adaptation and implementation of psychological interventions targeting the needs of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants aiming to find a match between needs, expectations, and the corresponding interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration number 2021-UNVRCLE-0106707, February 11 2021.

Mental health problems and needs of frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain: A qualitative analysis

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 hotspots worldwide have reported poor mental health outcomes since the pandemic's beginning. The virulence of the initial COVID-19 surge in Spain and the urgency for rapid evidence constrained early studies in their capacity to inform mental health programs accurately. Here, we used a qualitative research design to describe relevant mental health problems among frontline HCWs and explore their association with determinants and consequences and their implications for the design and implementation of mental health programs.

Materials and methods

Following the Programme Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation (DIME) protocol, we used a two-step qualitative research design to interview frontline HCWs, mental health experts, administrators, and service planners in Spain. We used Free List (FL) interviews to identify problems experienced by frontline HCWs and Key informant (KI) interviews to describe them and explore their determinants and consequences, as well as the strategies considered useful to overcome these problems. We used a thematic analysis approach to analyze the interview outputs and framed our results into a five-level social-ecological model (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and public health).

Results

We recruited 75 FL and 22 KI interviewees, roughly balanced in age and gender. We detected 56 themes during the FL interviews and explored the following themes in the KI interviews: fear of infection, psychological distress, stress, moral distress, and interpersonal conflicts among coworkers. We found that interviewees reported perceived causes and consequences across problems at all levels (intrapersonal to public health). Although several mental health strategies were implemented (especially at an intrapersonal and interpersonal level), most mental health needs remained unmet, especially at the organizational, community, and public policy levels.

Conclusions

In keeping with available quantitative evidence, our findings show that mental health problems are still relevant for frontline HCWs 1 year after the COVID-19 pandemic and that many reported causes of these problems are modifiable. Based on this, we offer specific recommendations to design and implement mental health strategies and recommend using transdiagnostic, low-intensity, scalable psychological interventions contextually adapted and tailored for HCWs.

Outcome of Patients With an Ultralow-Risk 70-Gene Signature in the MINDACT Trial

PURPOSE

Patients with 70-gene signature ultralow-risk breast cancers have shown excellent survival in historic cohorts, including randomized trials. The ultralow-risk subgroup was characterized to help avoid overtreatment. We evaluated outcomes of ultralow-risk patients in the largest cohort to date.

METHODS

Of the 6,693 patients enrolled in the EORTC-10041/BIG-3-04 randomized phase III MINDACT trial, profiling revealed an ultralow-risk 70-gene signature in 1,000 patients (15%). Distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were assessed in patients stratified by 70-gene signature result (high, low, and ultralow) by Kaplan-Meier analysis and hazard ratios with 95% CI from Cox regression.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 8.7 years. Of the ultralow-risk patients (n = 1,000), 67% were > 50 years, 81% had tumors ≤ 2 cm, 80% were lymph node-negative, 96% had grade 1 or 2 tumors, and 99% were estrogen receptor (ER)-positive. Systemic therapy was received by 84% of patients (69% endocrine therapy, 14% endocrine therapy plus chemotherapy, 1% other) and 16% received no adjuvant systemic treatment. The 8-year DMFI for ultralow-risk patients was 97.0% (95% CI, 95.8 to 98.1), which was 2.5% higher than for patients with low-risk tumors (n = 3,295, 94.5% [95% CI, 93.6 to 95.3]). The hazard ratio for DMFI was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.94) for ultralow versus low risk, after adjusting for clinical-pathologic and treatment characteristics. The 8-year BCSS for ultralow-risk patients was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.1 to 100).

CONCLUSION

Patients with an ultralow-risk 70-gene signature have the best prognosis, distinctive from low risk, with 8-year BCSS above 99%, and very few patients developed distant metastases with an 8-year DMFI rate of 97%. These patients could be candidates for further de-escalation of treatment, to avoid overtreatment and the risk of side effects.

Outcome of patients with an ultralow risk 70-gene signature in the MINDACT trial

500

Background: Gene signatures have proven successful in identifying patients with a low risk of distant recurrence who could forego chemotherapy (CT) and are currently included in international treatment guidelines for breast cancer. For the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint) an additional threshold was established within the low risk category to identify patients with an ultralow risk of distant recurrence. In independent cohorts, these patients had excellent breast cancer specific survival at 15 years, suggesting that ultralow risk cancers represent indolent disease (Esserman, JAMA Oncol 2017, Delahaye, BC Res Treat 2017). Here we evaluate survival of patients with an ultralow risk 70-gene signature who participated in the randomized phase 3 MINDACT trial (Piccart, Lancet Oncol 2021). Methods: Of the 6,693 patients enrolled in the MINDACT trial (EORTC 10041/BIG 3-04) between 2007-2011, profiling revealed an ultralow risk 70-gene signature in 1,000 patients (15%). We assessed 5- and 8-year distant metastasis free interval (DMFI) and breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) in patients stratified by 70-gene signature result (high, low, ultralow), and within the ultralow risk group stratified by clinical risk. For these exploratory analyses, we used Kaplan-Meier estimates for time to event endpoints and Cox-regression models to calculate hazard ratio’s (HR). Results: Median follow-up was 8.7 years. Among the ultralow risk patients (n = 1,000), 67% were ≥50 years, 81% had tumors < 2cm, 80% were lymph node negative, 96% had grade 1 or 2 tumors and 99% were ER-positive. Systemic therapy was received by 83% of patients (69% endocrine therapy (ET), 14% ET + CT) and 16% received no adjuvant systemic treatment (AST). Survival estimates for all endpoints are shown in the table; 8-year DMFI was 97.0% (95% CI 95.8-98.1) for ultralow risk. The 8-year DMFI in ultralow risk patients who received no AST or ET only was 97.8% (95% CI 95.3-100) and 97.4% (95% CI 96.1-98.7), respectively. The HR for DMFI was 0.66 (95% CI 0.46-0.95) for ultralow vs low risk, after adjusting for tumor and treatment characteristics (preliminary results). Conclusions: In this prospective study, patients with an ultralow risk 70-gene signature have an excellent prognosis with 8-year BCSS above 99% regardless of clinical risk status, and with an 8-year DMFI of 95-98%.[Table: see text]

Controlling technical variation amongst 6693 patient microarrays of the randomized MINDACT trial

Gene expression data obtained in large studies hold great promises for discovering disease signatures or subtypes through data analysis. It is also prone to technical variation, whose removal is essential to avoid spurious discoveries. Because this variation is not always known and can be confounded with biological signals, its removal is a challenging task. Here we provide a step-wise procedure and comprehensive analysis of the MINDACT microarray dataset. The MINDACT trial enrolled 6693 breast cancer patients and prospectively validated the gene expression signature MammaPrint for outcome prediction. The study also yielded a full-transcriptome microarray for each tumor. We show for the first time in such a large dataset how technical variation can be removed while retaining expected biological signals. Because of its unprecedented size, we hope the resulting adjusted dataset will be an invaluable tool to discover or test gene expression signatures and to advance our understanding of breast cancer.

A Computational Workflow Translates a 58-Gene Signature to a Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Sample-Based Companion Diagnostic for Personalized Treatment of the BRAF-Mutation-Like Subtype of Colorectal Cancers

Colorectal cancer patients with the BRAF(p.V600E) mutation have poor prognosis in metastatic setting. Personalized treatment options and companion diagnostics are needed to better treat these patients. Previously, we developed a 58-gene signature to characterize the distinct gene expression pattern of BRAF-mutation-like subtype (accuracy 91.1%). Further experiments repurposed drug Vinorelbine as specifically lethal to this BRAF-mutation-like subtype. The aim of this study is to translate this 58-gene signature from a research setting to a robust companion diagnostic that can use formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples to select patients with the BRAF-mutation-like subtype. BRAF mutation and gene expression data of 302 FFPE samples were measured (mutants = 57, wild-type = 245). The performance of the 58-gene signature in FFPE samples showed a high sensitivity of 89.5%. In the identified BRAF-mutation-like subtype group, 50% of tumours were known BRAF mutants, and 50% were BRAF wild-type. The stability of the 58-gene signature in FFPE samples was evaluated by two control samples over 40 independent experiments. The standard deviations (SD) were within the predefined criteria (control 1: SD = 0.091, SD/Range = 3.0%; control 2: SD = 0.169, SD/Range = 5.5%). The fresh frozen version and translated FFPE version of this 58-gene signature were compared using 170 paired fresh frozen and FFPE samples and the result showed high consistency (agreement = 99.3%). In conclusion, we translated this 58-gene signature to a robust companion diagnostic that can use FFPE samples.

Validation of the online prediction tool PREDICT v. 2.0 in the Dutch breast cancer population

BACKGROUND

PREDICT version 2.0 is increasingly used to estimate prognosis in breast cancer. This study aimed to validate this tool in specific prognostic subgroups in the Netherlands.

METHODS

All operated women with non-metastatic primary invasive breast cancer, diagnosed in 2005, were selected from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Predicted and observed 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) were compared for the overall cohort, separated by oestrogen receptor (ER) status, and predefined subgroups. A >5% difference was considered as clinically relevant. Discriminatory accuracy and goodness-of-fit were determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the Chi-squared-test.

RESULTS

We included 8834 patients. Discriminatory accuracy for 5-year OS was good (AUC 0.80). For ER-positive and ER-negative patients, AUCs were 0.79 and 0.75, respectively. Predicted 5-year OS differed from observed by -1.4% in the entire cohort, -0.7% in ER-positive and -4.9% in ER-negative patients. Five-year OS was accurately predicted in all subgroups. Discriminatory accuracy for 10-year OS was good (AUC 0.78). For ER-positive and ER-negative patients AUCs were 0.78 and 0.76, respectively. Predicted 10-year OS differed from observed by -1.0% in the entire cohort, -0.1% in ER-positive and -5.3 in ER-negative patients. Ten-year OS was overestimated (6.3%) in patients ≥75 years and underestimated (-13.%) in T3 tumours and patients treated with both endocrine therapy and chemotherapy (-6.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

PREDICT predicts OS reliably in most Dutch breast cancer patients, although results for both 5-year and 10-year OS should be interpreted carefully in ER-negative patients. Furthermore, 10-year OS should be interpreted cautiously in patients ≥75 years, T3 tumours and in patients considering endocrine therapy and chemotherapy.

Patterns and predictors of first and subsequent recurrence in women with early breast cancer

Purpose

Little is known about the occurrence, timing and prognostic factors for first and also subsequent local (LR), regional (RR) or distant (DM) breast cancer recurrence. As current follow-up is still consensus-based, more information on the patterns and predictors of subsequent recurrences can inform more personalized follow-up decisions.

Methods

Women diagnosed with stage I-III invasive breast cancer who were treated with curative intent were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (N = 9342). Extended Cox regression was used to model the hazard of recurrence over ten years of follow-up for not only site-specific first, but also subsequent recurrences after LR or RR.

Results

In total, 362 patients had LR, 148 RR and 1343 DM as first recurrence. The risk of first recurrence was highest during the second year post-diagnosis (3.9%; 95% CI 3.5–4.3) with similar patterns for LR, RR and DM. Young age (<40), tumour size >2 cm, tumour grade II/III, positive lymph nodes, multifocality and no chemotherapy were prognostic factors for first recurrence. The risk of developing a second recurrence after LR or RR (N = 176) was significantly higher after RR than after LR (50 vs 29%; p < 0.001). After a second LR or RR, more than half of the women were diagnosed with a third recurrence.

Conclusions

Although the risk of subsequent recurrence is high, absolute incidence remains low. Also, almost half the second recurrences are detected in the first year after previous recurrence and more than 80% are DM. This suggests that more intensive follow-up for early detection subsequent recurrence is not likely to be (cost-)effective.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10549-017-4340-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A breast cancer gene signature for indolent disease

PURPOSE

Early-stage hormone-receptor positive breast cancer is treated with endocrine therapy and the recommended duration of these treatments has increased over time. While endocrine therapy is considered less of a burden to patients compared to chemotherapy, long-term adherence may be low due to potential adverse side effects as well as compliance fatigue. It is of high clinical utility to identify subgroups of breast cancer patients who may have excellent long-term survival without or with limited duration of endocrine therapy to aid in personalizing endocrine treatment.

METHODS

We describe a new ultralow risk threshold for the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint) that identifies a group of breast cancer patients with excellent 20 year, long-term survival prognosis. Tumors of these patients are referred to as "indolent breast cancer." We used patient series on which we previously established and assessed the 70-gene signature high-low risk threshold.

RESULTS

In an independent validation cohort, we show that patients with indolent breast cancer had 100% breast cancer-specific survival at 15 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that patients with indolent disease may be candidates for limited treatment with adjuvant endocrine therapy based on their very low risk of distant recurrences or death of breast cancer.

Abstract P6-09-54: Long-term recurrence risk and risk-based follow-up after breast cancer treatment

This abstract was not presented at the symposium.

Prognostic Value of MammaPrint® in Invasive Lobular Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

MammaPrint® is a microarray-based gene expression test cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration to assess recurrence risk in early-stage breast cancer, aimed to guide physicians in making neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment decisions. The increase in the incidence of invasive lobular carcinomas (ILCs) over the past decades and the modest representation of ILC in the MammaPrint development data set calls for a stratified survival analysis dedicated to this specific subgroup.

STUDY AIM

The current study aimed to validate the prognostic value of the MammaPrint test for breast cancer patients with early-stage ILCs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Univariate and multivariate survival associations for overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were studied in a study population of 217 early-stage ILC breast cancer patients from five different clinical studies.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A significant association between MammaPrint High Risk and poor clinical outcome was shown for OS, DMFI, and DMFS. A subanalysis was performed on the lymph node-negative study population. In the lymph node-negative study population, we report an up to 11 times higher change in the diagnosis of an event in the MammaPrint High Risk group. For DMFI, the reported hazard ratio is 11.1 (95% confidence interval = 2.3-53.0).

CONCLUSION

Study results validate MammaPrint as an independent factor for breast cancer patients with early-stage invasive lobular breast cancer. Hazard ratios up to 11 in multivariate analyses emphasize the independent value of MammaPrint, specifically in lymph node-negative ILC breast cancers.

Equivalence of MammaPrint array types in clinical trials and diagnostics

MammaPrint is an FDA-cleared microarray-based test that uses expression levels of the 70 MammaPrint genes to assess distant recurrence risk in early-stage breast cancer. The prospective RASTER study proved that MammaPrint Low Risk patients can safely forgo chemotherapy, which is further subject of the prospective randomized MINDACT trial. While MammaPrint diagnostic results are obtained from mini-arrays, clinical trials may be performed on whole-genome arrays. Here we demonstrate the equivalence and reproducibility of the MammaPrint test. MammaPrint indices were collected for breast cancer samples: (i) on both customized certified array types (n = 1,897 sample pairs), (ii) with matched fresh and FFPE tissues (n = 552 sample pairs), iii) for control samples replicated over a period of 10 years (n = 11,333), and iv) repeated measurements (n = 280). The array type indicated a near perfect Pearson correlation of 0.99 (95 % CI: 0.989-0.991). Paired fresh and FFPE samples showed an excellent Pearson correlation of 0.93 (95 % CI 0.92-0.94), in spite of the variability introduced by intratumoral tissue heterogeneity. Control samples showed high consistency over 10 year's time (overall reproducibility of 97.4 %). Precision and repeatability are overall 98.2 and 98.3 %, respectively. Results confirm that the combination of the near perfect correlation between array types, excellent equivalence between tissue types, and a very high stability, precision, and repeatability demonstrate that results from clinical trials (such as MINDACT and I-SPY 2) are equivalent to current MammaPrint FFPE and fresh diagnostics, and can be used interchangeably.

Abstract P6-09-03: Time-dependent nomogram for risk of locoregional recurrence in early breast cancer patients: 10 year extension

Background

The objective of this study was to extent the recently developed and validated time-dependent logistic regression model and web-based nomogram. This nomogram is suitable for the annual long term risk prediction of locoregional recurrence (LRR) in individual breast cancer patients and clinical decision support with regard to the follow-up.

Methods

Women first diagnosed with early breast cancer between 2003-2006 in all Dutch hospitals were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry with five year of recurrence follow-up (n=37,230). Of the year 2003 follow-up was retrieved for ten years. In the first five years following primary breast cancer treatment 3.7% of the selected patients developed a LRR as a first event, in ten years 6.2%. Risk factors were determined using logistic regression and the risks were calculated per year, conditional on not being diagnosed with recurrence in the previous year. Discrimination and calibration were assessed. Bootstrapping was used for internal validation. Data on primary tumors diagnosed between 2007-2008 in 43 Dutch hospitals was used for external validation of the performance of the nomogram (n=12,308).

Results

The final model included the variables grade, size, multifocality, and nodal involvement of the primary tumor, and whether patients were treated with radio-, chemo- or hormone therapy. Model predictions were well calibrated. Estimates in the validation cohort did not differ significantly from the index cohort. The results were incorporated in a web-based nomogram. In 0.7% of the patients, the risk of LRR between year 5-10 was higher than the average risk of all patients in the first five years. All of these patients were aged below 50, had a tumour size larger than 2 cm, non-negative hormone status, received radiotherapy, but no hormone therapy and 19% developed a recurrence during ten years.

Conclusion/discussion

This validated and time-dependent nomogram for the prediction of annual LRR risks over ten years is simple to use and shows a good predictive ability in the Dutch population. It can be used as an instrument to identify patients with a low or high risk of LRR who might benefit from a less or more intensive and longer follow-up after breast cancer and to aid clinical decision-making for personalized follow-up.

Citation Format: Witteveen A, Vliegen IMH, Sonke GS, Klaase JM, IJzerman MJ, Siesling S. Time-dependent nomogram for risk of locoregional recurrence in early breast cancer patients: 10 year extension. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-09-03.

Gene Expression Profiling to Identify the Histogenetic Origin of Metastatic Adenocarcinomas of Unknown Primary

Purpose

Patients with adenocarcinoma of unknown primary origin (ACUP) constitute approximately 4% of all malignancies. For effective treatment of these patients, it is considered optimal to identify the primary tumor origins. Currently, the success rate of the diagnostic work-up is only 20% to 30%. Our goal was to evaluate the contribution of gene expression profiling for routine clinical practice in patients with ACUP.

Patients and Methods

Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples were obtained from 84 patients with a known primary adenocarcinoma and from 38 patients with ACUP. An extensive immunohistochemical panel classified 16 of the patients with ACUP, whereas 22 patients remained unclassified for their histogenetic origin. Information about staging procedures and clinical follow-up were available in all patient cases. The expression data were analyzed in relation to clinicopathologic variables and immunohistochemical results.

Results

The gene expression–based assay classified the primary site correctly in 70 (83%) of 84 patient cases of primary and metastatic tumors of known origin, with good sensitivity for the majority of the tumor classes and relatively poor sensitivity for primary lung adenocarcinoma. Gene expression profiling identified 15 (94%) of 16 patients with initial ACUP who were classified by immunohistochemistry, and it made a valuable contribution to a potential site of origin in 14 of the 22 patients with ACUP.

Conclusion

The gene expression platform can classify correctly from FFPE samples the majority of tumors classes both in patients with known primary and in patients with ACUP. Therefore, gene expression profiling represents an additional analytic approach to assist with the histogenetic diagnosis of patients with ACUP.

A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer

BACKGROUND

A more accurate means of prognostication in breast cancer will improve the selection of patients for adjuvant systemic therapy.

METHODS

Using microarray analysis to evaluate our previously established 70-gene prognosis profile, we classified a series of 295 consecutive patients with primary breast carcinomas as having a gene-expression signature associated with either a poor prognosis or a good prognosis. All patients had stage I or II breast cancer and were younger than 53 years old; 151 had lymph-node-negative disease, and 144 had lymph-node-positive disease. We evaluated the predictive power of the prognosis profile using univariable and multivariable statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Among the 295 patients, 180 had a poor-prognosis signature and 115 had a good-prognosis signature, and the mean (+/-SE) overall 10-year survival rates were 54.6+/-4.4 percent and 94.5+/-2.6 percent, respectively. At 10 years, the probability of remaining free of distant metastases was 50.6+/-4.5 percent in the group with a poor-prognosis signature and 85.2+/-4.3 percent in the group with a good-prognosis signature. The estimated hazard ratio for distant metastases in the group with a poor-prognosis signature, as compared with the group with the good-prognosis signature, was 5.1 (95 percent confidence interval, 2.9 to 9.0; P<0.001). This ratio remained significant when the groups were analyzed according to lymph-node status. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that the prognosis profile was a strong independent factor in predicting disease outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The gene-expression profile we studied is a more powerful predictor of the outcome of disease in young patients with breast cancer than standard systems based on clinical and histologic criteria.