The 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay for Node-Positive, Early-Stage Breast Cancer and Impact of RxPONDER Trial on Chemotherapy Decision-Making: Have Clinicians Already Decided?

View More View Less
  • a From the Departments of Internal Medicine, Radiation Oncology, and Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado.
Restricted access

Background: The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay is retrospectively validated for assessing prognosis and benefit from chemotherapy in hormone receptor–positive, early-stage breast cancer (EBC) with low RS. We hypothesized that oncologists have already incorporated the RS assay for decision-making in higher-risk, node-positive disease, despite the lack of prospective data and contrary to NCCN Guideline recommendations. This study provides the first analysis of trends and differences in RS use and therapeutic implications in a population-based data set of patients with node-positive EBC. It also assesses the impact of the RxPONDER trial on clinicians' chemotherapy recommendations. Methods: Node-positive EBC cases diagnosed during 2010 through 2012 and included in the National Cancer Data Base were used. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate test use and impact on chemotherapy recommendations. Results: The RS assay was ordered for 16.5% of the 80,405 identified patients. Of all variables, the RS assay had the strongest association with chemotherapy recommendation, with adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of 19 for scores >30. Odds of chemotherapy recommendation were significantly lower for the group who received the test (AOR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.20–0.22). When divided based on the cutoff point of 25 adopted by the RxPONDER trial, those with an RS of 18 to 25 had significantly lower odds of chemotherapy recommendation compared with those with an RS of 26 to 30 (AOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.26–0.40). Test use was lower for blacks, community centers, uninsured/governmentally insured patients, higher tumor grade, larger tumor size, and more nodes involved. Chemotherapy recommendation was higher for patients of younger age, with private insurance, and with higher tumor grade, size, and number of nodes involved. Black patients had significantly higher RS (AOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.25–1.79). Conclusions: The RS assay influences clinicians' chemotherapy recommendation in node-positive EBC. Clinicians are using the inclusion criteria of the RxPONDER trial before its final release. Black patients have higher RS, likely representing worse biology. Significant differences exist in test use and clinical implications based on race, insurance, and facility.

Author contributions: Study hypothesis formulation: Fisher, Amini, Shagisultanova, Rabinovitch, Borges, Elias, Kabos. Literature review: Jasem, Kabos. Data analysis: Jasem. Drafting of manuscript: Jasem, Kabos. Critical review of manuscript: Fisher, Amini, Shagisultanova, Rabinovitch, Borges, Elias.

Correspondence: Jagar Jasem, MD, MPH, University of Colorado, 12631 East 17th Avenue Parkway, Aurora, CO 80045. E-mail: jagar.jasem@ucdenver.edu
  • 1.

    Chen C, Dhanda R, Tseng WY. Evaluating use characteristics for the oncotype dx 21-gene recurrence score and concordance with chemotherapy use in early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 2013;9:182187.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Eifel P, Axelson JA, Costa J. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, November 1–3, 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:979989.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD. Meeting highlights: updated international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:33573365.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Paik S, Shak S, Tang G. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351:28172826.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Paik S. Development and clinical utility of a 21-gene recurrence score prognostic assay in patients with early breast cancer treated with tamoxifen. Oncologist 2007;12:631635.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Sparano JA, Paik S. Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:721728.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Habel LA, Shak S, Jacobs MK. A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients. Breast Cancer Res 2006;8:R25.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2015;373:20052014.

  • 9.

    Jasem J, Amini A, Rabinovitch R. 21-gene recurrence score assay as a predictor of adjuvant chemotherapy administration for early-stage breast cancer: an analysis of use, therapeutic implications, and disparity profile. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:19952002.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S. 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 2010;11:5565.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Dowsett M, Cuzick J, Wale C. 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 2010;28:18291834.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Albain KS, Barlow WE, Ravdin PM. Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009;374:20552063.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Paik S, Tang G, Shak S. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:37263734.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    SWOG RxPONDER Trial (S1007): Patient Information. Available at: http://swog.org/Visitors/S1007/patients.asp. Accessed February 20, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Yamauchi H, Nakagawa C, Takei H. Prospective study of the effect of the 21-gene assay on adjuvant clinical decision-making in Japanese women with estrogen receptor-positive, node-negative, and node-positive breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2014;14:191197.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    de Boer RH, Baker C, Speakman D. The impact of a genomic assay (Oncotype DX) on adjuvant treatment recommendations in early breast cancer. Med J Aust 2013;199:205208.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Eiermann W, Rezai M, Kummel S. The 21-gene recurrence score assay impacts adjuvant therapy recommendations for ER-positive, node-negative and node-positive early breast cancer resulting in a risk-adapted change in chemotherapy use. Ann Oncol 2013;24:618624.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Geffen DB, Abu-Ghanem S, Sion-Vardy N. The impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on decision making about adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer in an oncology practice with a unified treatment policy. Ann Oncol 2011;22:23812386.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Dinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD. 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 2015;1:10981109.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Balassanian R. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Breast Cancer. Version 2.2016. Accessed February 20, 2017. To view the most recent version of these guidelines, visit NCCN.org.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Lerro CC, Robbins AS, Phillips JL, Stewart AK. Comparison of cases captured in the national cancer data base with those in population-based central cancer registries. Ann Surg Oncol 2013;20:17591765.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Information for CoC-Accredited programs. American College of Surgeons Web site. Available at: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/cancer/coc/apply/categories#. Accessed February 20, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms. National Cancer Institute Web site. Available at: https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms. Accessed February 20, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373383.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Fried G, Moskovitz M. Treatment decisions in estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer patients with intermediate oncotype DX recurrence score results. Springerplus 2014;3:71.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Hayes DF. Targeting adjuvant chemotherapy: a good idea that needs to be proven! J Clin Oncol 2012;30:12641267.

  • 27.

    Borges VF, Elias AD. The era of high-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer: revisiting a troubled quest. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:32053206.

  • 28.

    Welch HG, Mogielnicki J. Presumed benefit: lessons from the American experience with marrow transplantation for breast cancer. BMJ 2002;324:10881092.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. What's the rush? The dissemination and adoption of preliminary research results. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:372373.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Venook AP, Niedzwiecki D, Lopatin M. Biologic determinants of tumor recurrence in stage II colon cancer: validation study of the 12-gene recurrence score in Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9581. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:17751781.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31.

    Eroles P, Bosch A, Perez-Fidalgo JA, Lluch A. Molecular biology in breast cancer: intrinsic subtypes and signaling pathways. Cancer Treat Rev 2012;38:698707.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Roberts MC, Weinberger M, Dusetzina SB. Racial variation in adjuvant chemotherapy initiation among breast cancer patients receiving oncotype DX testing. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2015;153:191200.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Aizer AA, Wilhite TJ, Chen MH. Lack of reduction in racial disparities in cancer-specific mortality over a 20-year period. Cancer 2014;120:15321539.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Bickell NA, Wang JJ, Oluwole S. Missed opportunities: racial disparities in adjuvant breast cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:13571362.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Hershman DL, Unger JM, Barlow WE. Treatment quality and outcomes of African American versus white breast cancer patients: retrospective analysis of Southwest Oncology studies S8814/S8897. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:21572162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Menashe I, Anderson WF, Jatoi I, Rosenberg PS. Underlying causes of the black-white racial disparity in breast cancer mortality: a population-based analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:9931000.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Weir HK, Thun MJ, Hankey BF. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2000, featuring the uses of surveillance data for cancer prevention and control. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:12761299.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Lund MJ, Mosunjac M, Davis KM. 21-Gene recurrence scores: racial differences in testing, scores, treatment, and outcome. Cancer 2012;118:788796.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Adler NE, Newman K. Socioeconomic disparities in health: pathways and policies. Health Aff (Millwood) 2002;21:6076.

  • 40.

    Asad J, Jacobson AF, Estabrook A. Does oncotype DX recurrence score affect the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer? Am J Surg 2008;196:527529.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Holt S, Bertelli G, Brinkworth E. Results from a prospective clinical study on the impact of Oncotype DX on adjuvant treatment decision making in a cohort of 142 UK patients [abstract]. Presented at the 34th Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; December 6–10, 2011; San Antonio, Texas. Abstract P5-14-26.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Effect of menopausal status and oncotype recurrence score on treatment choice for early-stage receptor-positive breast cancer [abstract]. Presented at the 2009 Breast Cancer Symposium; October 8–10, 2009; San Francisco, California. Abstract 356.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43.

    Oratz R, Paul D, Cohn AL, Sedlacek SM. Impact of a commercial reference laboratory test recurrence score on decision making in early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 2007;3:182186.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Fentiman IS, Fourquet A, Hortobagyi GN. Male breast cancer. Lancet 2006;367:595604.

  • 45.

    Grenader T, Yerushalmi R, Tokar M. The 21-gene recurrence score assay (Oncotype DX) in estrogen receptor-positive male breast cancer: experience in an Israeli cohort. Oncology 2014;87:16.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46.

    Shak S, Palmer G, Baehner FL. Molecular characterization of male breast cancer by standardized quantitative RT-PCR analysis: first large genomic study of 347 male breast cancers compared to 82,434 female breast cancers [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2009;27(Suppl):Abstract 549.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1315 784 105
PDF Downloads 568 330 18
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0