Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31917424›Full record

Trial reportJAMA oncology2020

Association Between 21-Gene Assay Recurrence Score and Locoregional Recurrence Rates in Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer.

Wendy A Woodward, William E Barlow, Reshma Jagsi, Thomas A Buchholz, Steven Shak, Frederick Baehner, Timothy J Whelan, Nancy E Davidson, James N Ingle, Tari A King and 8 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Advances in regional nodal management of early-stage breast cancer.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2024
    Article
  16. New Approaches in Breast Cancer Radiotherapy.European journal of breast health · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Reply to Y. Wang et al and Q. Sui et al.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 13 institutions in 2 countries.

Wendy A WoodwardDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
William E BarlowCancer Research and Biostatics, Seattle, Washington.
Reshma JagsiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Thomas A BuchholzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Steven ShakDepartment of Pathology, Genomic Health Inc, Redwood City, California.
Frederick BaehnerDepartment of Pathology, Genomic Health Inc, Redwood City, California.
Timothy J WhelanDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Nancy E DavidsonDivision of Medical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
James N IngleDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Tari A KingDepartment of Surgery, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Peter M RavdinDepartment of Medicine, Cancer Therapy & Research Center, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio.
C Kent OsborneDepartment of Medicine, Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Debasish TripathyDepartment of Breast Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Robert B LivingstonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Julie R GralowDepartment of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle.
Gabriel N HortobagyiDepartment of Breast Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Daniel F HayesDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kathy S AlbainDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, Illinois.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USGenomic Health (United States) · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USBaylor College of Medicine · USCancer Research And Biostatistics · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · USLoyola University Chicago · USMayo Clinic · USMcMaster University · CASeattle Cancer Care Alliance · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
SWOG Network Group Operations Center of the NCTNU10CA180888 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI PRIMO N. LARA · 2014 to 2026
$152.1M
SWOG Statistics & Data Management Center complex - extension supplement for GY06U10CA180819 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Michael L. LeBlanc · 2014 to 2026
$115.2M
UM LAPs -UG1 GrantUG1CA233160 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI ANNE F SCHOTT · 2019 to 2026
$5.4M
Hutchinson Center as Lead Academic Participating Site (UG1)UG1CA233328 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Evan Yu · 2019 to 2026
$4.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180819NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180888NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233160NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233328
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The 21-gene assay recurrence score is increasingly used to personalize treatment recommendations for systemic therapy in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)- or progesterone receptor (PR)-positive, node-positive breast cancer; however, the relevance of the 21-gene assay to radiotherapy decisions remains uncertain. Objective: To examine the association between recurrence score and locoregional recurrence (LRR) in a postmenopausal patient population treated with adjuvant chemotherapy followed by tamoxifen or tamoxifen alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a retrospective analysis of the Southwest Oncology Group S8814, a phase 3 randomized clinical trial of postmenopausal women with ER/PR-positive, node-positive breast cancer treated with tamoxifen alone, chemotherapy followed by tamoxifen, or concurrent tamoxifen and chemotherapy. Patients at North American clinical centers were enrolled from June 1989 to July 1995. Medical records from patients with recurrence score information were reviewed for LRR and radiotherapy use. Primary analysis included 316 patients and excluded 37 who received both mastectomy and radiotherapy, 9 who received breast-conserving surgery without documented radiotherapy, and 5 with unknown surgical type. All analyses were performed from January 22, 2016, to August 9, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The LRR was defined as a recurrence in the breast; chest wall; or axillary, infraclavicular, supraclavicular, or internal mammary lymph nodes. Time to LRR was tested with log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards regression for multivariate models. Results: The final cohort of this study comprised 316 women with a mean (range) age of 60.4 (44-81) years. Median (interquartile range) follow-up for those without LRR was 8.7 (7.0-10.2) years. Seven LRR events (5.8%) among 121 patients with low recurrence score and 27 LRR events (13.8%) among 195 patients with intermediate or high recurrence score occurred. The estimated 10-year cumulative incidence rates were 9.7% for those with a low recurrence score and 16.5% for the group with intermediate or high recurrence score (P = .02). Among patients who had a mastectomy without radiotherapy (n = 252), the differences in the 10-year actuarial LRR rates remained significant: 7.7 % for the low recurrence score group vs 16.8% for the intermediate or high recurrence score group (P = .03). A multivariable model controlling for randomized treatment, number of positive nodes, and surgical type showed that a higher recurrence score was prognostic for LRR (hazard ratio [HR], 2.36; 95% CI, 1.02-5.45; P = .04). In a subset analysis of patients with a mastectomy and 1 to 3 involved nodes who did not receive radiation therapy, the group with a low recurrence score had a 1.5% rate of LRR, whereas the group with an intermediate or high recurrence score had a 11.1% LRR (P = .051). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that higher recurrence scores were associated with increased LRR after adjustment for treatment, type of surgical procedure, and number of positive nodes. This finding suggests that the recurrence score may be used, along with accepted clinical variables, to assess the risk of LRR during radiotherapy decision-making.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMastectomyMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisReceptors, EstrogenERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneTamoxifen

Identifiers

PMID31917424
PMCPMC6990911
OpenAlexW3000043704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.