Outcomes based on risk-adapted adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: a nationwide, prospective cohort study by the Danish Breast Cancer Group

Maj-Britt Jensen, Emma Torpe, Zoë Teunissen, Gry Taarnhøj, Eva Brix, Ann Knoop, Sophie Yammeni, Frede Donskov, Bent Ejlertsen
{"title":"Outcomes based on risk-adapted adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: a nationwide, prospective cohort study by the Danish Breast Cancer Group","authors":"Maj-Britt Jensen, Emma Torpe, Zoë Teunissen, Gry Taarnhøj, Eva Brix, Ann Knoop, Sophie Yammeni, Frede Donskov, Bent Ejlertsen","doi":"10.1016/s1470-2045(25)00085-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background</h3>Clinical prediction models are increasingly used to guide treatment in patients with early breast cancer. The Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) has developed a prognostic standard mortality rate index (PSI) for prediction of excess mortality based on 5 years of endocrine therapy. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of the PSI.<h3>Methods</h3>In this nationwide, prospective cohort study, we included postmenopausal Danish women aged 50 years or older with invasive oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative resected breast cancer registered in the DBCG clinical database (close to all Danish women newly diagnosed with invasive breast cancer are registered in the national database). All participants were assigned a PSI category. Patients in the PSI 1 category were recommended 5 years of endocrine therapy; patients in PSI 2, 3, or 4 category were recommended endocrine therapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy according to Danish national guidelines. The primary endpoint was standard mortality ratio. Univariable and multivariable analyses for standard mortality ratio, overall survival, and recurrence-free survival were performed applying Kaplan–Meier, cumulative incidence, Poisson regression, and Fine–Gray subdistribution hazards model.<h3>Findings</h3>25 027 women diagnosed with breast cancer between Aug 1, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018, and registered with the DBCG clinical database were identified. 8921 of those registered were eligible, assigned a PSI category (6704 [75%] PSI 1, 1300 [15%] PSI 2, 745 [8%] PSI 3, and 172 [2%] PSI 4), and included in the study. 8514 [96%] of 8830 women initiated endocrine therapy and 91 had an unknown therapy status. Adherence at 4·5 years was 67·8% (66·6–69·0) in the PSI 1 group and 72·3% (70·5–74·3) in the PSI 2–4 groups. Crude standard mortality ratio was 0·89 (95% CI 0·85–0·95) with PSI 1, 1·71 (95% CI 1·47–1·97) with PSI 2, and 2·39 (95% CI 1·99–2·88) with PSI 3–4. Compared with patients who completed adjuvant therapy with PSI 1, relative risk (RR) for excess mortality was 1·33 (95% CI 1·01–1·76) for patients with PSI 2 whereas patients with PSI 3–4 retained an excess mortality (RR 2·31, 95% CI 1·74–3·05) even with completed therapy.<h3>Interpretation</h3>These data validate the clinical use of the PSI tool for risk adapted treatment allocation. In patients with PSI 1, the omission of chemotherapy was not associated with excess mortality overall and a distinct better outcome was seen in patients with completed endocrine therapy versus those who had not completed. With completed adjuvant therapy, excess mortality was low for patients with PSI 2, whereas patients with PSI 3–4 had high excess mortality, potentially warranting intensified treatment and requiring further investigation.<h3>Funding</h3>None.","PeriodicalId":22865,"journal":{"name":"The Lancet Oncology","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Lancet Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(25)00085-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Clinical prediction models are increasingly used to guide treatment in patients with early breast cancer. The Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) has developed a prognostic standard mortality rate index (PSI) for prediction of excess mortality based on 5 years of endocrine therapy. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of the PSI.

Methods

In this nationwide, prospective cohort study, we included postmenopausal Danish women aged 50 years or older with invasive oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative resected breast cancer registered in the DBCG clinical database (close to all Danish women newly diagnosed with invasive breast cancer are registered in the national database). All participants were assigned a PSI category. Patients in the PSI 1 category were recommended 5 years of endocrine therapy; patients in PSI 2, 3, or 4 category were recommended endocrine therapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy according to Danish national guidelines. The primary endpoint was standard mortality ratio. Univariable and multivariable analyses for standard mortality ratio, overall survival, and recurrence-free survival were performed applying Kaplan–Meier, cumulative incidence, Poisson regression, and Fine–Gray subdistribution hazards model.

Findings

25 027 women diagnosed with breast cancer between Aug 1, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018, and registered with the DBCG clinical database were identified. 8921 of those registered were eligible, assigned a PSI category (6704 [75%] PSI 1, 1300 [15%] PSI 2, 745 [8%] PSI 3, and 172 [2%] PSI 4), and included in the study. 8514 [96%] of 8830 women initiated endocrine therapy and 91 had an unknown therapy status. Adherence at 4·5 years was 67·8% (66·6–69·0) in the PSI 1 group and 72·3% (70·5–74·3) in the PSI 2–4 groups. Crude standard mortality ratio was 0·89 (95% CI 0·85–0·95) with PSI 1, 1·71 (95% CI 1·47–1·97) with PSI 2, and 2·39 (95% CI 1·99–2·88) with PSI 3–4. Compared with patients who completed adjuvant therapy with PSI 1, relative risk (RR) for excess mortality was 1·33 (95% CI 1·01–1·76) for patients with PSI 2 whereas patients with PSI 3–4 retained an excess mortality (RR 2·31, 95% CI 1·74–3·05) even with completed therapy.

Interpretation

These data validate the clinical use of the PSI tool for risk adapted treatment allocation. In patients with PSI 1, the omission of chemotherapy was not associated with excess mortality overall and a distinct better outcome was seen in patients with completed endocrine therapy versus those who had not completed. With completed adjuvant therapy, excess mortality was low for patients with PSI 2, whereas patients with PSI 3–4 had high excess mortality, potentially warranting intensified treatment and requiring further investigation.

Funding

None.
基于风险适应辅助治疗的绝经后早期乳腺癌妇女的结果:丹麦乳腺癌组的一项全国性前瞻性队列研究
临床预测模型越来越多地用于指导早期乳腺癌患者的治疗。丹麦乳腺癌小组(DBCG)制定了一个预后标准死亡率指数(PSI),用于根据5年内分泌治疗预测超额死亡率。在本研究中,我们旨在评估PSI的临床应用。方法在这项全国范围的前瞻性队列研究中,我们纳入了年龄在50岁或以上的丹麦绝经后妇女,她们患有在DBCG临床数据库中登记的侵袭性雌激素受体阳性和her2阴性切除的乳腺癌(接近所有在国家数据库中登记的新诊断为侵袭性乳腺癌的丹麦妇女)。所有参与者都被分配到一个PSI类别。PSI 1型患者推荐5年内分泌治疗;根据丹麦国家指南,PSI 2、3或4类患者推荐内分泌治疗加辅助化疗。主要终点为标准死亡率。应用Kaplan-Meier、累积发病率、泊松回归和Fine-Gray亚分布风险模型对标准死亡率、总生存率和无复发生存率进行单变量和多变量分析。在2013年8月1日至2018年12月31日期间,共有25027名女性被诊断为乳腺癌,并在DBCG临床数据库中注册。8921名注册者符合条件,被分配PSI类别(6704名[75%]PSI 1, 1300名[15%]PSI 2, 745名[8%]PSI 3, 172名[2%]PSI 4),并被纳入研究。8830名女性中有8514人(96%)开始接受内分泌治疗,91人治疗情况不明。4 . 5年时,PSI 1组的依从性为67.8% (66.6 - 69.0),PSI 2-4组的依从性为72.3%(70.5 - 74.3)。PSI 1的粗标准死亡率为0.89 (95% CI 0.85 ~ 0.95), PSI 2的为1.71 (95% CI 1.47 ~ 1.97), PSI 3-4的为2.39 (95% CI 1.99 ~ 2.88)。与完成PSI 1辅助治疗的患者相比,PSI 2患者超额死亡率的相对风险(RR)为1.33 (95% CI 1.01 - 1.76),而PSI 3-4患者即使完成治疗仍保持超额死亡率(RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.74 - 3.05)。解释:这些数据验证了PSI工具在风险适应治疗分配中的临床应用。在PSI 1患者中,遗漏化疗与总体死亡率无关,完成内分泌治疗的患者与未完成内分泌治疗的患者相比,预后明显更好。完成辅助治疗后,PSI 2患者的超额死亡率较低,而PSI 3-4患者的超额死亡率较高,可能需要加强治疗,并需要进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信