An Invasive Disease Event-Free Survival Analysis to Investigate Ki67 Role with Respect to Breast Cancer Patients’ Age: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Data
2.2. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Harbeck, N.; Penault-Llorca, F.; Cortes, J.; Gnant, M.; Houssami, N.; Poortmans, P.; Ruddy, K.; Tsang, J.; Cardoso, F. Breast cancer. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers 2019, 5, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, K.-T.; Kim, J.; Jung, J.; Chang, J.H.; Chai, Y.J.; Oh, S.W.; Oh, S.; Kim, Y.A.; Park, S.B.; Hwang, K.R. Impact of breast cancer subtypes on prognosis of women with operable invasive breast cancer: A population-based study using SEER database. Clin. Cancer Res. 2018, 25, 1970–1979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, Y.; Yin, Q.; Yu, Q.; Zhang, J.; Liu, Z.; Wang, S.; Lv, S.; Niu, Y. A retrospective study of breast cancer subtypes: The risk of relapse and the relations with treatments. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2011, 130, 489–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hennigs, A.; Riedel, F.; Gondos, A.; Sinn, P.; Schirmacher, P.; Marmé, F.; Jäger, D.; Kauczor, H.-U.; Stieber, A.; Lindel, K.; et al. Prognosis of breast cancer molecular subtypes in routine clinical care: A large prospective cohort study. BMC Cancer 2016, 16, 734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zaha, D.C. Significance of immunohistochemistry in breast cancer. World J. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 5, 382–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mannell, A. The role of Ki-67 in breast cancer. S. Afr. J. Surg. 2016, 54, 10–13. [Google Scholar]
- Vittoria Dieci, M.; Laura Biganzoli, A.; del Mastro, L. Saverio Cinieri AIOM. Available online: https://www.aiom.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2018_LG_AIOM_Mammella.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2022).
- Johnson, K.S.; Conant, E.F.; Soo, M.S. Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer: A Review for Breast Radiologists. J. Breast Imaging 2021, 3, 12–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anders, C.K.; Johnson, R.; Litton, J.; Phillips, M.; Bleyer, A. Breast Cancer Before Age 40 Years. Semin. Oncol. 2009, 36, 237–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, J.; Han, W.; Jung, S.Y.; Park, Y.H.; Moon, H.G.; Ahn, S.K.; Lee, J.W.; Kim, M.K.; Kim, J.J.; Lee, E.S.; et al. The Value of Ki67 in Very Young Women with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: Retrospective Analysis of 9321 Korean Women. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2015, 22, 3481–3488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabiani, L.; Houvenaeghel, G.; Heinemann, M.; Reyal, F.; Classe, J.M.; Cohen, M.; Garbay, J.R.; Giard, S.; Charitansky, H.; Chopin, N.; et al. Breast cancer in young women: Pathologic features and molecular phenotype. Breast 2016, 29, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, Q.; Ma, D.; Gao, R.-F.; Yu, K.-D. Effect of Ki-67 Expression Levels and Histological Grade on Breast Cancer Early Relapse in Patients with Different Immunohistochemical-based Subtypes. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 7648–7649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brandt, J.; Garne, J.P.; Tengrup, I.; Manjer, J. Age at diagnosis in relation to survival following breast cancer: A cohort study. World J. Surg. Oncol. 2015, 13, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fanizzi, A.; Ressa, M.C.; Gatta, G.; Cristofaro, C.; de Santis, V.; Didonna, V.; Diotaiuti, S.; la Forgia, D.; Petruzzellis, N.; Tamborra, P.; et al. Disease-Free Survival after Breast Conservation Therapy vs. Mastectomy of Patients with T1/2 Breast Cancer and No Lymph Node Metastases: Our Experience. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 9800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pathmanathan, N.; Balleine, R.L. Ki67 and proliferation in breast cancer. J. Clin. Pathol. 2013, 66, 512–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yerushalmi, R.; Woods, R.; Ravdin, P.M.; Hayes, M.M.; Gelmon, K.A. Ki67 in breast cancer: Prognostic and predictive potential. Lancet Oncol. 2010, 11, 174–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Penault-Llorca, F.; Radosevic-Robin, N. Ki67 assessment in breast cancer: An update. Pathology 2017, 49, 166–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hudis, C.A.; Barlow, W.E.; Costantino, J.P.; Gray, R.J.; Pritchard, K.I.; Chapman, J.-A.W.; Sparano, J.A.; Hunsberger, S.; Enos, R.A.; Gelber, R.D.; et al. Proposal for Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points in Adjuvant Breast Cancer Trials: The STEEP System. J. Clin. Oncol. 2007, 25, 2127–2132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harbeck, N.; Thomssen, C.; Gnant, M. St. Gallen 2013: Brief Preliminary Summary of the Consensus Discussion. Breast Care 2013, 8, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Anampa, J.; Makower, D.; Sparano, J.A. Progress in adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: An overview. BMC Med. 2015, 13, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kamińska, M.; Ciszewski, T.; Łopacka-Szatan, K.; Miotła, P.; Starosławska, E. Breast cancer risk factors. Prz. Menopauzalny 2015, 14, 196–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jörger, M.; Senn, H.-J.; Thürlimann, B. St. Gallen 2009 recommendations on the treatment of early breast cancer: Consensus and controversy. Memo Mag. Eur. Med. Oncol. 2010, 2, 229–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, E.L.; Meier, P. Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1958, 53, 457–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schober, P.; Vetter, T.R. Survival Analysis and Interpretation of Time-to-Event Data: The tortoise and the hare. Anesthesia and Analgesia. Anesth. Analg. 2018, 127, 792–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kartsonaki, C. Survival analysis. Diagn. Histopathol. 2016, 22, 263–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pocock, S.J.; Clayton, T.C.; Altman, D.G. Survival plots of time-to-event outcomes in clinical trials: Good practice and pitfalls. Lancet 2002, 359, 1686–1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bland, J.M.; Altman, D.G. The logrank test. BMJ 2004, 328, 1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cox, D.R. Regression Models and Life-Tables. J. R. Stat. Soc. 1972, 34, 187–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stekhoven, D.J.; Bühlmann, P. MissForest—Non-parametric missing value imputation for mixed-type data. Bioinformatics 2011, 28, 112–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sabatier, R.; Gonçalves, A.; Bertucci, F. Personalized medicine: Present and future of breast cancer management. Crit. Rev. Oncol. 2014, 91, 223–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, K. Endocrine therapy for breast cancer: An overview. Breast 2007, 16, 327–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalia, M. Biomarkers for personalized oncology: Recent advances and future challenges. Metab. Clin. Exp. 2015, 64, S16–S21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bellotti, R. The MAGIC-5 Project: Medical applications on a GRID infrastructure connection. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium Conference Record Nuclear Science, Rome, Italy, 16–22 October 2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massafra, R. Radiomic Feature Reduction Approach to Predict Breast Cancer by Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography Images. Diagnostics 2021, 10, 684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Features | Under 50 Years Old | Over 50 Years Old | Features | Under 50 Years Old | Over 50 Years Old |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Overall | 385; 100% | 515; 100% | Grading | ||
Molecular Subtype * | G1 (abs.; %) | 34; 8.8% | 54; 10.5% | ||
Luminal A (abs.; %) | 151; 39.2% | 240; 46.5% | G2 (abs.; %) | 167; 43.4% | 232; 45% |
Luminal B (abs.; %) | 120; 31.2% | 105; 20.4% | G3 (abs.; %) | 168; 43.6% | 210; 40.8% |
HER2+ (abs.; %) | 52; 13.5% | 93; 18.1% | NA (abs.; %) | 16; 4.2% | 19; 3.7% |
Triple Negative (abs.; %) | 62; 16.1% | 77; 15% | Multifocality * | ||
Diameter | Absent (abs.; %) | 290; 75.3% | 427; 82.9% | ||
T1a (abs.; %) | 7; 1.8% | 21; 4.1% | Present (abs.; %) | 95; 24.7% | 88; 17.1% |
T1b (abs.; %) | 41; 10.7% | 60; 11.7% | Previous Tumors | ||
T1c (abs.; %) | 157; 40.8% | 216; 41.9% | Yes (abs.; %) | 11; 2.9% | 19; 3.7% |
T2 (abs.; %) | 133; 34.5% | 175; 34% | No (abs.; %) | 374; 97.1% | 496; 96.3% |
T3 (abs.; %) | 19; 4.9% | 11; 2.1% | Histological type | ||
T4 (abs.; %) | 12; 3.1% | 20; 3.9% | Ductal (abs.; %) | 335; 87.0% | 428; 83.1% |
NA (abs.; %) | 16; 4.2% | 12; 2.3% | Lobular (abs.; %) | 29; 7.5% | 42; 8.2% |
LN status * | Others (abs.; %) | 21; 5.5% | 45; 8.7% | ||
N0 (abs.; %) | 194; 50.4% | 305; 59.2% | LVI * | ||
N1 (abs.; %) | 130; 33.8% | 139; 27% | Absent (abs.; %) | 240; 62.4% | 339; 65.8% |
N2 (abs.; %) | 40; 10.4% | 38; 7.4% | Focal (abs.; %) | 52; 13.5% | 94; 18.3% |
N3 (abs.; %) | 18; 4.7% | 29; 5.6% | Extensive (abs.; %) | 29; 7.5% | 20; 3.9% |
NA (abs.; %) | 3; 0.7% | 4; 0.8% | Not typed (abs.; %) | 64; 16.6% | 62; 12.0% |
Chemotherapy * | |||||
None (abs.; %) | 100; 26% | 218; 42.3% | |||
1st generation (abs.; %) | 118; 30.6% | 129; 25% | |||
2nd generation (abs.; %) | 87; 22.6% | 92; 17.9% | |||
3rd generation (abs.; %) | 80; 20.8% | 76; 14.8% |
Variation | 5-Year IDEFS | |||||
ki67 < 10 | 10 ≤ ki67 < 20 | ki67 ≥ 20 | ||||
n. Events | Pr. (95% C.I.) | n. Events | Pr. (95% C.I.) | n. Events | Pr. (95% C.I.) | |
Under 50 years old | 10 | 87.5 (80.5–95.1) | 14 | 82.6 (74.7–91.4) | 49 | 75.6 (69.8–81.8) |
Over 50 years old | 11 | 92.1 (87.7–96.7) | 22 | 82.9 (76.6–89.7) | 51 | 76.2 (70.7–82.2) |
p-value | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.3 | |||
10-year IDEFS | ||||||
ki67 < 10 | 10 ≤ ki67 < 20 | ki67 ≥ 20 | ||||
n. Events | Pr. (95% C.I.) | n. Events | Pr. (95% C.I.) | n. Events | Pr. (95% C.I.) | |
Under 50 years old | 14 | 82.0 (73.9–91.1) | 26 | 64.7 (54.5–76.8) | 71 | 62.6 (55.0–70.0) |
Over 50 years old | 21 | 84.0 (77.9–90.5) | 32 | 73.3 (65.7–81.8) | 68 | 66.6 (60.3–73.6) |
p-value | 0.3 | 0.02 * | 0.1 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Massafra, R.; Bove, S.; La Forgia, D.; Comes, M.C.; Didonna, V.; Gatta, G.; Giotta, F.; Latorre, A.; Nardone, A.; Palmiotti, G.; et al. An Invasive Disease Event-Free Survival Analysis to Investigate Ki67 Role with Respect to Breast Cancer Patients’ Age: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Cancers 2022, 14, 2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14092215
Massafra R, Bove S, La Forgia D, Comes MC, Didonna V, Gatta G, Giotta F, Latorre A, Nardone A, Palmiotti G, et al. An Invasive Disease Event-Free Survival Analysis to Investigate Ki67 Role with Respect to Breast Cancer Patients’ Age: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Cancers. 2022; 14(9):2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14092215
Chicago/Turabian StyleMassafra, Raffaella, Samantha Bove, Daniele La Forgia, Maria Colomba Comes, Vittorio Didonna, Gianluca Gatta, Francesco Giotta, Agnese Latorre, Annalisa Nardone, Gennaro Palmiotti, and et al. 2022. "An Invasive Disease Event-Free Survival Analysis to Investigate Ki67 Role with Respect to Breast Cancer Patients’ Age: A Retrospective Cohort Study" Cancers 14, no. 9: 2215. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14092215