Good Old clinical markers have similar power in breast cancer prognosis as microarray gene expression profilers

被引:116
作者
Edén, P
Ritz, C
Rose, C
Fernö, M
Peterson, C
机构
[1] Lund Univ, Dept Oncol, Jubileum Inst, SE-22185 Lund, Sweden
[2] Lund Univ, Complex Syst Div, Dept Theoret Phys, SE-22362 Lund, Sweden
关键词
breast cancer; prognosis; metastases; cDNA microarray; gene expression; histopathology; cell hiology; oestrogen receptor; artificial neural network;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejca.2004.02.025
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
We compared the power of gene expression measurements with that of conventional prognostic markers, i.e., clinical, histopathological, and cell biological parameters, for predicting distant metastases in breast cancer patients using both established prognostic indices (e.g., the Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI)) and novel combinations of conventional markers. We used publicly available data on 97 patients, and the performance of metastasis prediction was represented by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) areas and Kaplan-Meier plots. The gene expression profiler did not perform noticeably better than indices constructed from the clinical variables, e.g., the well established NPI. When analysing separately subgroups, according to the oestrogen receptor (ER) status both approaches could predict clinical outcome more easily for the ER-positive than for the ER-negative cohort. Given the time it may take before microarray processing is used worldwide, particularly due to the costs and the lack of standards, it is important to pursue research using conventional markers. Our analysis suggests that it might be possible to improve the combination of different conventional prognostic markers into one prognostic index. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1837 / 1841
页数:5
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] Methodological challenges in the evaluation of prognostic factors in breast cancer
    Altman, DG
    Lyman, GH
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 1998, 52 (1-3) : 289 - 303
  • [2] BLAMEY RW, 1979, CLIN ONCOL-US, V5, P227
  • [3] Eifel P, 2001, JNCI-J NATL CANCER I, V93, P979
  • [4] Meeting highlights: International Consensus Panel on the Treatment of Primary Breast Cancer
    Goldhirsch, A
    Glick, JH
    Gelber, RD
    Senn, HJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1998, 90 (21) : 1601 - 1608
  • [5] Gruvberger S, 2001, CANCER RES, V61, P5979
  • [6] THE MEANING AND USE OF THE AREA UNDER A RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC (ROC) CURVE
    HANLEY, JA
    MCNEIL, BJ
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1982, 143 (01) : 29 - 36
  • [7] Analyzing array data using supervised methods
    Ringnér, M
    Peterson, C
    Khan, J
    [J]. PHARMACOGENOMICS, 2002, 3 (03) : 403 - 415
  • [8] CONFIRMATION OF A PROGNOSTIC INDEX IN PRIMARY BREAST-CANCER
    TODD, JH
    DOWLE, C
    WILLIAMS, MR
    ELSTON, CW
    ELLIS, IO
    HINTON, CP
    BLAMEY, RW
    HAYBITTLE, JL
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1987, 56 (04) : 489 - 492
  • [9] A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer.
    van de Vijver, MJ
    He, YD
    van 't Veer, LJ
    Dai, H
    Hart, AAM
    Voskuil, DW
    Schreiber, GJ
    Peterse, JL
    Roberts, C
    Marton, MJ
    Parrish, M
    Atsma, D
    Witteveen, A
    Glas, A
    Delahaye, L
    van der Velde, T
    Bartelink, H
    Rodenhuis, S
    Rutgers, ET
    Friend, SH
    Bernards, R
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 347 (25) : 1999 - 2009
  • [10] Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer
    van't Veer, LJ
    Dai, HY
    van de Vijver, MJ
    He, YDD
    Hart, AAM
    Mao, M
    Peterse, HL
    van der Kooy, K
    Marton, MJ
    Witteveen, AT
    Schreiber, GJ
    Kerkhoven, RM
    Roberts, C
    Linsley, PS
    Bernards, R
    Friend, SH
    [J]. NATURE, 2002, 415 (6871) : 530 - 536