4.1 Article

21-gene recurrence score testing in the older population with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer

Journal

JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages 322-329

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.07.006

Keywords

Breast Cancer; Geriatric; Recurrence Score; Genomic Testing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) (Oncotype Dx, Genomic Health, Redwood City Ca) has not been validated in an older cohort with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate RS validity in a group of older women with ER-positive breast cancer. Methods: Utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database with available RS, we evaluated women with ER-positive breast cancer aged 18-69 and those 70 years of age and older from 2004 to 2014. We utilized multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate factors associated with RS testing as well as a high-risk categorization for those who underwent testing. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Results: We identified 363,876 women aged 18-69 years and 147,107 women aged 70 years and older. A smaller proportion of patients in the older group (8%) underwent RS testing than in the younger group (18%). Of the patients who underwent testing, distribution of RS was similar between groups. High-risk categorization independently predicted a higher likelihood of death for older patients (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.15-1.90). Among patients with high-risk RS, chemotherapy was associated with a decreased risk of death in the younger group, but not in the older group. Conclusion: Older women are less likely to receive RS testing, but when tested, older patients have a similar distribution of RS as compared to younger patients. While high-risk categorization in the older cohort was prognostic, chemotherapy was not associated with improved survival. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available