Discrepancies Between the Tennessee Nomogram and Oncotype DX: Implications for the Korean Breast Cancer Population-The BRAIN Study.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Cancers Pub Date : 2025-09-21 DOI:10.3390/cancers17183083
Suk Jun Lee, Joo Heung Kim, Jee Hyun Ahn, So Hyeon Gwon, Ilkyun Lee, Seho Park, Nak-Hoon Son
{"title":"Discrepancies Between the Tennessee Nomogram and Oncotype DX: Implications for the Korean Breast Cancer Population-The BRAIN Study.","authors":"Suk Jun Lee, Joo Heung Kim, Jee Hyun Ahn, So Hyeon Gwon, Ilkyun Lee, Seho Park, Nak-Hoon Son","doi":"10.3390/cancers17183083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Oncotype DX (ODX) is widely used to estimate recurrence risk and guide adjuvant therapy in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer. However, limited accessibility and high costs have prompted the use of alternative clinical models, such as the Tennessee nomogram. This study aimed to validate the predictive performance of the Tennessee nomogram in a Korean breast cancer cohort and identify factors contributing to discrepancies between nomogram predictions and ODX results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed data on1298 patients with HR+/HER2-, node-negative invasive breast cancer who underwent ODX testing between May 2013 and August 2023. Predictive probabilities were calculated using the Tennessee nomogram and compared with actual ODX recurrence scores. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under the curve (AUC) were determined. Discordant cases were examined for clinicopathologic characteristics contributing to prediction errors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The nomogram demonstrated an overall accuracy of 86.1% (sensitivity 0.130, specificity 0.989, AUC 0.776). Discordant results were observed in 13.9% of cases, primarily in patients with a high histologic grade, PR negativity, and elevated Ki-67 index. Most false negatives clustered within the ODX score range of 25-30, suggesting underestimation of risk in borderline-high cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Tennessee nomogram may be a useful surrogate when ODX testing is unavailable, but caution is warranted in patients with aggressive tumor biology. In such cases, ODX testing should be prioritized to guide adjuvant therapy decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9681,"journal":{"name":"Cancers","volume":"17 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468432/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancers","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17183083","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Oncotype DX (ODX) is widely used to estimate recurrence risk and guide adjuvant therapy in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer. However, limited accessibility and high costs have prompted the use of alternative clinical models, such as the Tennessee nomogram. This study aimed to validate the predictive performance of the Tennessee nomogram in a Korean breast cancer cohort and identify factors contributing to discrepancies between nomogram predictions and ODX results.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data on1298 patients with HR+/HER2-, node-negative invasive breast cancer who underwent ODX testing between May 2013 and August 2023. Predictive probabilities were calculated using the Tennessee nomogram and compared with actual ODX recurrence scores. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under the curve (AUC) were determined. Discordant cases were examined for clinicopathologic characteristics contributing to prediction errors.

Results: The nomogram demonstrated an overall accuracy of 86.1% (sensitivity 0.130, specificity 0.989, AUC 0.776). Discordant results were observed in 13.9% of cases, primarily in patients with a high histologic grade, PR negativity, and elevated Ki-67 index. Most false negatives clustered within the ODX score range of 25-30, suggesting underestimation of risk in borderline-high cases.

Conclusions: The Tennessee nomogram may be a useful surrogate when ODX testing is unavailable, but caution is warranted in patients with aggressive tumor biology. In such cases, ODX testing should be prioritized to guide adjuvant therapy decisions.

田纳西Nomogram和Oncotype DX之间的差异:对韩国乳腺癌人群的启示-脑研究。
背景:在激素受体阳性(HR+)、her2阴性的早期乳腺癌中,Oncotype DX (ODX)被广泛用于评估复发风险和指导辅助治疗。然而,有限的可及性和高昂的费用促使使用替代临床模型,如田纳西nomogram。本研究旨在验证田纳西nomogram在韩国乳腺癌队列中的预测性能,并确定导致nomogram预测与ODX结果之间差异的因素。方法:我们回顾性分析了2013年5月至2023年8月期间接受ODX检测的1298例HR+/HER2-淋巴结阴性浸润性乳腺癌患者的数据。使用田纳西nomogram计算预测概率,并与实际的ODX复发评分进行比较。测定敏感性、特异性、准确性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和曲线下面积(AUC)。对不一致的病例进行临床病理特征检查,导致预测错误。结果:nomogram总体准确度为86.1% (sensitivity 0.130, specificity 0.989, AUC 0.776)。在13.9%的病例中观察到不一致的结果,主要是在高组织学分级、PR阴性和Ki-67指数升高的患者中。大多数假阴性聚集在ODX评分25-30的范围内,表明在边缘高病例中低估了风险。结论:当不能进行ODX检测时,田纳西图可能是一种有用的替代方法,但对于具有侵袭性肿瘤生物学的患者,需要谨慎。在这种情况下,ODX检测应优先指导辅助治疗决策。
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
Cancers
Cancers Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
9.60%
发文量
5371
审稿时长
18.07 days
期刊介绍: Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal on oncology. It publishes reviews, regular research papers and short communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信