Validation of the PREDICT Breast Version 3.0 Prognostic Tool in US Breast Cancer Patients
Hsiao, Y.-W.; Wishart, G.; Pharoah, P.; Peng, P.-C.
Show abstract
BackgroundPREDICT Breast v3 is the latest updated prognostication tool, developed from the breast cancer registry of approximately 35,000 women diagnosed between 2000 and 2018 in the United Kingdom. However, its performance in the United States (US) population is unknown. This study aims to validate PREDICT Breast v3 using newly released Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) outcome data for US breast cancer patients and to address potential health disparities. MethodsOver 860,000 female patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2018 with primary breast cancer and followed for at least 10 years were selected from the SEER database. Predicted and observed 10- and 15-year breast cancer-specific survival outcomes were compared for the overall cohort, stratified by estrogen receptor (ER) status, and predefined subgroups. Discriminatory accuracy was determined through the area under the receiver-operator curves (AUC). ResultsPREDICT Breast v3 demonstrated good calibration and discrimination for long-term breast cancer-specific mortality. It provided accurate mortality estimates (within a {+/-}10% error range) across the entire US population for 10-year (-8% in ER-positive and 4% in ER-negative patients) and 15-year (-3 % in ER-positive and 5% in ER-negative patients) all-cause mortality, for both ER statuses. The model also showed good performance for 10- and 15-year all-cause mortality across the U.S. population, with AUC of 0.769 and 0.793 for ER-positive breast cancer as well as AUC of 0.738 and 0.746 for ER-negative breast cancer. However, recalibration is needed for specific groups, such as non-Hispanic Asian and non-Hispanic Black patients with ER-negative status. ConclusionsPREDICT v3 accurately predicts 10- and 15-year overall survival in contemporary US breast cancer patients. Future work should focus on promoting equitable care by addressing disparities that are observed in predictive tools.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- An updated PREDICT breast cancer prognostic model including the benefits and harms of radiotherapy 98%
- RNA Sequencing-Based Single Sample Predictors of Molecular Subtype and Risk of Recurrence for Clinical Assessment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer 93%
- Investigating the relationship between breast cancer risk factors and an AI-generated mammographic texture feature in the Nurses' Health Study II 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Studies of parenchymal texture added to mammographic breast density and risk of breast cancer: a systematic review of the methods used in the literature 94%
- Effect of testosterone therapy on breast tissue composition and mammographic breast density in trans masculine individuals 93%
- Comparative validation of the BOADICEA and Tyrer-Cuzick breast cancer risk models incorporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk in a population-based prospective cohort 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Prognostic value of the Residual Cancer Burden index according to breast cancer subtype: validation on a cohort of BC patients treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. 93%
- Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in pN1 Breast Cancer: Survival Outcomes and Prognostic Factors From a Single-Institution Cohort 93%
- BREAst screening Tailored for HEr (BREATHE) - A Study Protocol On Personalised Risk-based Breast Cancer Screening Programme 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Use of natural language understanding to facilitate surgical de-escalation of axillary staging in patients with breast cancer 95%
- Towards Predicting 30-Day Readmission among Oncology Patients: Identifying Timely and Actionable Risk Factors 90%
- Machine learning and mechanistic modeling for prediction of metastatic relapse in breast cancer 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.