Validation of PREDICT Version 2.2 in a Retrospective Cohort of Indian Women With Operable Breast Cancer

• Published in: JCO global oncology Vol. 9; no. 9; p. e2300114
• Main Authors: Nair, Nita S, Kothari, Bhavika, Gupta, Sudeep, Kanann, Sadhana, Vanmali, Vaibhav, Hawaldar, Rohini, Tondare, Ashutosh, Siddique, Shabina, Parmar, Vani, Joshi, Shalaka, Badwe, R A
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wolters Kluwer Health 01-09-2023; American Society of Clinical Oncology
• Subjects: Aged; Breast Neoplasms - pathology; Breast Neoplasms - surgery; Female; Humans; India - epidemiology; Middle Aged; ORIGINAL REPORTS; Retrospective Studies; India
• ISSN: 2687-8941; 2687-8941
• DOI: 10.1200/GO.23.00114

Online prediction models that use known prognostic factors in breast cancer (BC) are routinely used to assist in decisions for adjuvant therapy. PREDICT Version 2.2 (P2.2) is one such online tool, which uses tumor size, lymph node involvement, grade, age, hormone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, and Ki67. We performed an external validation in a retrospective cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center in India.
Women with operable BC between 2008 and 2016 with nonmetastatic, T1-T2 invasive, and HER2 receptor-negative BC and with available 5-year overall survival (OS) data were selected. Median predicted 5-year OS rates were used to calculate predicted events for the whole cohort and subgroups. The chi-square test was used to evaluate the goodness of fit of the tool.
Of 11,760 cases registered between 2008 and 2016, 2,783 (23.66%) eligible patients with a median age of 50 (26-70) years and a median pT size of 2.5 (0.1-5) cm, 2,037 (73.19%) with grade 3 tumors, 1,172 (42.11%) with node-positive disease, 817 (29.35%) with triple-negative breast cancer, and 1,966 (70.64%) with HR-positive BC were included in the analysis. The observed 5-year OS and predicted 5-year OS in the whole cohort were 94.8% and 90.00%, respectively, with an absolute difference of 4.8% (95% CI, 3.417 to 6.198,
< .001). The observed 5-year OS and predicted 5-year OS were also different in various subgroups.
PREDICT version 2.2 overestimated the number of deaths, with lower predicted 5-year OS compared with the observed value, in this retrospective Indian cohort. The reasons for this discrepancy could be differing biologic characteristics and possible selection bias in our cohort. We recommend a prospective validation of PREDICT in Indian patients and advocate caution in its use until such validation is achieved.