Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Breast cancer-specific survival in patients with lymph node-positive hormone receptor-positive invasive breast cancer and Oncotype DX Recurrence Score results in the SEER database

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Oncotype DX® Breast Recurrence Score™ (RS) assay is validated to predict breast cancer (BC) recurrence and adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in select patients with lymph node-positive (LN+), hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative BC. We assessed 5-year BC-specific survival (BCSS) in LN+ patients with RS results in SEER databases.

Methods

In this population-based study, BC cases in SEER registries (diagnosed 2004–2013) were linked to RS results from assays performed by Genomic Health (2004–2014). The primary analysis included only patients (diagnosed 2004–2012) with LN+ (including micrometastases), HR+ (per SEER), and HER2-negative (per RT-PCR) primary invasive BC (N = 6768). BCSS, assessed by RS category and number of positive lymph nodes, was calculated using the actuarial method.

Results

The proportion of patients with RS results and LN+ disease (N = 8782) increased over time between 2004 and 2013, and decreased with increasing lymph node involvement from micrometastases to ≥4 lymph nodes. Five-year BCSS outcomes for those with RS < 18 ranged from 98.9% (95% CI 97.4–99.6) for those with micrometastases to 92.8% (95% CI 73.4–98.2) for those with ≥4 lymph nodes. Similar patterns were found for patients with RS 18–30 and RS ≥ 31. RS group was strongly predictive of BCSS among patients with micrometastases or up to three positive lymph nodes (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Overall, 5-year BCSS is excellent for patients with RS < 18 and micrometastases, one or two positive lymph nodes, and worsens with additionally involved lymph nodes. Further analyses should account for treatment variables, and longitudinal updates will be important to better characterize utilization of Oncotype DX testing and long-term survival outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

1LN:

One positive lymph node

1–3LN:

One to three positive lymph nodes

2LN:

Two positive lymph nodes

2–3LN:

Two to three positive lymph nodes

3LN:

Three positive lymph nodes

≥4LN:

Four or more positive lymph nodes

ANOVA:

Analysis of variance

BC:

Breast cancer

BCSS:

Breast cancer-specific survival

CI:

Confidence interval

ER:

Estrogen receptor

HER2:

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2

HR+:

Hormone receptor-positive (ER-positive, PR-positive, or both)

LN+:

Lymph node-positive

N1mi:

Micrometastases

PR:

Progesterone receptor

RS:

Recurrence Score®

RT-PCR:

Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction

RxPONDER:

Treatment (Rx) for positive node, endocrine-responsive breast cancer

SD:

Standard deviation

SEER:

Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results

SES:

Socioeconomic status

References

  1. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Walker MG, Watson D, Park T, Hiller W, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Bryant J, Wolmark N (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351(27):2817–2826. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa041588

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Watson D, Bryant J, Costantino JP, Geyer CE Jr, Wickerham DL, Wolmark N (2006) Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(23):3726–3734. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.04.7985

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Albanell J, Gonzalez A, Ruiz-Borrego M, Alba E, Garcia-Saenz JA, Corominas JM, Burgues O, Furio V, Rojo A, Palacios J, Bermejo B, Martinez-Garcia M, Limon ML, Munoz AS, Martin M, Tusquets I, Rojo F, Colomer R, Faull I, Lluch A (2012) Prospective transGEICAM study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and traditional clinicopathological factors on adjuvant clinical decision making in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) node-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol 23(3):625–631. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdr278

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Asad J, Jacobson AF, Estabrook A, Smith SR, Boolbol SK, Feldman SM, Osborne MP, Boachie-Adjei K, Twardzik W, Tartter PI (2008) Does Oncotype DX Recurrence Score affect the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer? Am J Surg 196(4):527–529. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.06.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Henry LR, Stojadinovic A, Swain SM, Prindiville S, Cordes R, Soballe PW (2009) The influence of a gene expression profile on breast cancer decisions. J Surg Oncol 99(6):319–323. doi:10.1002/jso.21244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Joh JE, Esposito NN, Kiluk JV, Laronga C, Lee MC, Loftus L, Soliman H, Boughey JC, Reynolds C, Lawton TJ, Acs PI, Gordan L, Acs G (2011) The effect of Oncotype DX Recurrence Score on treatment recommendations for patients with estrogen receptor-positive early stage breast cancer and correlation with estimation of recurrence risk by breast cancer specialists. Oncologist 16(11):1520–1526. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0045

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Dinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Lyman GH, Curtis LH (2015) Association between use of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and receipt of chemotherapy among medicare beneficiaries with early-stage breast cancer, 2005–2009. JAMA Oncol 1(8):1098–1109. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2722

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Reed SD, Dinan MA, Schulman KA, Lyman GH (2013) Cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in the context of multifactorial decision making to guide chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. Genet Med 15(3):203–211. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Trosman JR, Van Bebber SL, Phillips KA (2010) Coverage policy development for personalized medicine: private payer perspectives on developing policy for the 21-gene assay. J Oncol Pract 6(5):238–242. doi:10.1200/JOP.000075

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB, Yeh IT, Ravdin P, Bugarini R, Baehner FL, Davidson NE, Sledge GW, Winer EP, Hudis C, Ingle JN, Perez EA, Pritchard KI, Shepherd L, Gralow JR, Yoshizawa C, Allred DC, Osborne CK, Hayes DF, Breast Cancer Intergroup of North America (2010) Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 11(1):55–65. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70314-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Wale C, Forbes J, Mallon EA, Salter J, Quinn E, Dunbier A, Baum M, Buzdar A, Howell A, Bugarini R, Baehner FL, Shak S (2010) Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. J Clin Oncol 28(11):1829–1834. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.24.4798

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2015) NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer. Invasive breast cancer. https://www.nccn.org/

  13. Wong WB, Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Garrison LP Jr, Veenstra DL (2012) The value of comparative effectiveness research: projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007). Contemp Clin Trials 33(6):1117–1123. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2012.08.006

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Grenader T, Yerushalmi R, Tokar M, Fried G, Kaufman B, Peretz T, Geffen DB (2014) The 21-gene recurrence score assay (Oncotype DX) in estrogen receptor-positive male breast cancer: experience in an Israeli cohort. Oncology 87(1):1–6. doi:10.1159/000360793

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. National Center for Health Statistics (2016) http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/index.htm. Accessed 6 July 2016

  16. Howlader N, Ries LA, Mariotto AB, Reichman ME, Ruhl J, Cronin KA (2010) Improved estimates of cancer-specific survival rates from population-based data. J Natl Cancer Inst 102(20):1584–1598. doi:10.1093/jnci/djq366

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Noone AM, Lund JL, Mariotto A, Cronin K, McNeel T, Deapen D, Warren JL (2016) Comparison of SEER treatment data with medicare claims. Med Care 54(9):e55–e64. doi:10.1097/MLR.0000000000000073

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Petkov V, Miller DP, Howlader N, Gliner N, Howe W, Schussler N, Cronin K, Baehner FL, Cress R, Deapen D, Glaser SL, Hernandez BY, Lynch CF, Mueller L, Schwartz AG, Schwartz SM, Stroup A, Sweeney C, Tucker TC, Ward KC, Wiggins C, Wu X, Penberthy L, Shak S (2016) Breast-cancer-specific mortality in patients treated based on the 21-gene assay: a SEER population-based study. NPJ Breast Cancer 2:16017. doi:10.1038/npjbcancer.2016.17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Roberts MC, Weinberger M, Dusetzina SB, Dinan MA, Reeder-Hayes KE, Carey LA, Troester MA, Wheeler SB (2016) Racial variation in the uptake of oncotype DX testing for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 34(2):130–138. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.63.2489

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Anna Lau for medical writing and editorial assistance. The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and endorsement by any State, Department of Public Health, the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or their Contractors and Subcontractors is not intended nor should be inferred. The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program is funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Genomic Health performed the work to electronically submit the Recurrence Score results, but provided no funding for this study. We acknowledge the SEER registries for collecting the SEER data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    Megan C. Roberts & Valentina I. Petkov

  2. Genomic Health Inc., 301 Penobscot Drive, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA

    Dave P. Miller & Steven Shak

Authors
  1. Megan C. Roberts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dave P. Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven Shak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Valentina I. Petkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Megan C. Roberts.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Roberts and Dr. Petkov declare no conflicts of interest. Mr. Dave Miller and Dr. Stephen Shak are employed by and have stock ownership in Genomic Health Inc.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 364 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roberts, M.C., Miller, D.P., Shak, S. et al. Breast cancer-specific survival in patients with lymph node-positive hormone receptor-positive invasive breast cancer and Oncotype DX Recurrence Score results in the SEER database. Breast Cancer Res Treat 163, 303–310 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4162-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4162-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation