Adjuvant Chemotherapy De-Escalation with Genomic Assay Protocol in Patients with Early Breast Cancer: A Single-Centre Prospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Genomic assays are useful tools for tailoring adjuvant treatment in early breast cancer. We aimed to analyse the role of an institutional protocol of a genomic assay for chemotherapy de-escalation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective cohort study of all consecutive women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer, tested with the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay from August 2015 to July 2018 at a Portuguese cancer centre. For being tested, patients should meet at least one of the pre-defined inclusion criteria: i) luminal A-like, pT2pN0; ii) luminal A-like, 1 - 3 positive nodes and comorbidities with higher risk of chemotherapy-induced toxicity; iii) pT1-2pN0, progesterone receptor ≤ 20% and/or Ki67 14% - 40%. Adjuvant treatment was de-escalated to isolated endocrine therapy if RS was less than 18. We measured the reduction in chemotherapy prescribing and its clinical impact, the RS association with pathologic features, and the protocol feasibility.

RESULTS

We tested 154 women with a median age of 61 years old (range: 25 - 79), 69% postmenopausal. Tumours were mainly pT1 (55%), pN0 (82%), invasive ductal (73%), G2 (86%), luminal B-like (69%) and stage IA (85%). We obtained a RS less than 18 in 60% of women, with an overall adjuvant chemotherapy reduction of 65%. Seven (95% confidence interval: 5 - 10) patients needed to be screened with the 21-gene RS assay to prevent one clinically relevant adverse event during the first six months of adjuvant treatment. Considering the currently used RS cut-off, only 9% of node-negative and 11% of node-positive patients had RS over 25. We found no relevant associations between RS and pathologic features. The protocol was feasible and did not compromise the adequate timing for adjuvant treatment.

CONCLUSION

These criteria allowed the de-escalation of adjuvant systemic treatment in at least six out of ten women.

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of the 21-Gene Assay in Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal

Purpose Prior studies examining cost effectiveness of the 21-gene assay (Oncotype DX [ODX]) for women with hormone receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer have yielded disparate results. We aimed to explore why these analyses may have yielded different conclusions. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of ODX. We examined the extent to which the structure of CEA modeling, the assumptions of the models, and the selection of input parameters influenced cost-effectiveness estimates. We also explored the prevalence of industry funding and whether industry funding was associated with study designs favoring ODX. Results We identified 27 analyses, 15 of which received industry funding. In 18 studies, the clinical characteristics (eg, tumor size and grade) commonly used to make chemotherapy decisions were not incorporated into simulation modeling; thus, these studies would favor ODX being cost effective and might not reflect clinical practice. Most studies ignored the heterogeneous effect of ODX on chemotherapy use; only five studies assumed that ODX would increase chemotherapy use for clinically low-risk patients but decrease chemotherapy use for clinically high-risk patients. No study used population-based joint distributions of ODX recurrence score and tumor characteristics, and 12 studies inappropriately assumed that chemotherapy would increase distant recurrence for the low recurrence score group; both approaches overestimated the benefits of ODX. Industry-funded studies tended to favor ODX; all five studies that reported ODX as being cost saving were industry funded. In contrast, two studies that reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio > $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year were not funded by industry. Conclusion Although a majority of published analyses indicated that ODX is cost effective, they incorporated study designs that can increase the risk of bias.

Implementation of the 21-gene recurrence score test in the United States in 2011

PURPOSE

We examined hospital use of the 21-gene breast cancer test in the United States. We report state-level differences in utilization and propose a model for predicting implementation of guideline-recommended genomic testing.

METHODS

Genomic Health provided test orders for calendar year 2011.We summarized utilization at the hospital and state levels. Using logistic regression, we analyzed the association between the likelihood to order the test and the hospital's institutional and regional characteristics.

RESULTS

In 2011, 45% of 4,712 acute-care hospitals ordered the test, which suggests that 25% of newly diagnosed invasive female breast cancer cases were tested. Significant predictors of testing included participation in National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical research cooperative groups (odds ratio (OR) 3.73; 95% confidence interval, 2.96-4.70), advanced imaging (OR, 2.19; CI, 1.78-2.68), high-complexity laboratory (OR, 2.15; CI, 1.24-3.70), affiliation with a medical school (OR, 1.57; CI, 1.31-1.88), and reconstructive surgery (OR, 1.23; CI, 1.01-1.50). Significant regional predictors included metropolitan county (OR, 3.77; CI, 2.83-5.03), above-mean income (OR, 1.37; CI, 1.11-1.69), and education (OR, 1.26; CI, 1.03-1.54). Negative predictors included designation as a critical-access hospital (OR, 0.10; CI, 0.07-0.14) and distance from an NCI cancer center (OR, 0.998; CI, 0.997-0.999), with a 15% decrease in likelihood for every 100 miles.

CONCLUSION

Despite considerable market penetration of the test, there are significant regional and site-of-care differences in implementation, particularly in rural states.Genet Med 18 10, 982-990.

Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: does the use of Oncotype DX tumor gene expression profiling to guide treatment decisions improve outcomes in patients with breast cancer?

of

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group found insufficient evidence to recommend for or against the use of Oncotype DX testing to guide chemotherapy treatment decisions in women with hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-negative, or lymph node-positive early breast cancer who are receiving endocrine therapy. This recommendation statement updates a 2009 EGAPP statement on the use of gene expression profiling tests in breast cancer. Evidence of clinical validity for Oncotype DX was confirmed as adequate. With regard to clinical utility, although there was evidence from prospective retrospective studies that the Oncotype DX test predicts benefit from chemotherapy, and there was adequate evidence that the use of Oncotype DX gene expression profiling in clinical practice changes treatment decisions regarding chemotherapy, no direct evidence was found that the use of Oncotype DX testing leads to improved clinical outcomes.

RATIONALE

In women with early-stage invasive breast cancer, gene expression profiling is increasingly being used as an aid to estimate the likely benefit from chemotherapy treatment. In a previous recommendation statement, the EGAPP Working Group (EWG) found adequate evidence for clinical validity of some gene expression profiling tests in predicting distant disease recurrence in women with early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, lymph-node-negative breast cancer who are treated with tamoxifen, but insufficient evidence that use of these tests for decisions about chemotherapy treatment has clinical utility. The current recommendation statement updates these findings for Oncotype DX and extends them to the population of women with lymph node-positive disease, using evidence from recent systematic reviews and other sources.

ANALYTIC VALIDITY

The previous recommendation statement found that evidence was inadequate to enable quantitative determination of the analytic validity of Oncotype DX. Analytic validity was not reconsidered in the updated recommendation statement because there remains no gold-standard test for comparison.

CLINICAL VALIDITY

The EWG found that new evidence published since the original evidence review supports the clinical validity of Oncotype DX in predicting risk of distant metastases in women with hormone receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer that is either node-negative or node-positive.

CLINICAL UTILITY

No direct evidence was found that use of Oncotype DX tumor gene expression profiling to guide treatment decisions improves clinical outcomes in women with early breast cancer. There is indirect evidence, from prospective retrospective studies on archived tissue samples from randomized controlled trials, that the Oncotype DX test can predict benefit from chemotherapy. Large, prospective, randomized, controlled trials currently in progress may provide evidence of clinical utility.

CONTEXTUAL ISSUES

Until definitive evidence for clinical utility is available, clinicians must decide on a case-by-case basis whether to offer the test to patients. Although Oncotype DX testing has been reported, on the basis of economic modeling studies, to be cost-effective in several different health-care systems and to save costs in the US health-care setting, studies were based on assumptions regarding the clinical utility of the test that require confirmation by clinical trial results.Genet Med 18 8, 770-779.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Use and Health Care Costs After Introduction of Genomic Testing in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

We assessed the associations between the 21-gene recurrence score assay (RS) receipt, subsequent chemotherapy use, and medical expenditures among patients with early-stage breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry were used to assemble a retrospective cohort of women with early-stage breast cancer from 2007 to 2010 who underwent initial surgical treatment. These data were merged with administrative claims from the 12-month periods before and after diagnosis to identify comorbidities, treatments, and expenditures (n = 7,287). Propensity score-weighted regression models were estimated to identify the effects of RS receipt on chemotherapy use and medical spending in the year after diagnosis.

RESULTS

The associations between RS receipt and outcomes varied markedly by patient age. RS use was associated with lower chemotherapy use among women younger than 55 (19.2% lower; 95% CI, 10.6 to 27.9). RS use was associated with higher chemotherapy use among women 75 to 84 years old (5.7% higher; 95% CI, 0.4 to 11.0). RS receipt was associated with lower adjusted 1-year medical spending among women younger than 55 ($15,333 lower; 95% CI, $2,841 to $27,824) and with higher spending among women who were 75 to 84 years old ($3,489 higher; 95% CI, $857 to $6,122).

CONCLUSION

RS receipt was associated with reduced use of adjuvant chemotherapy and lower health care spending among women with breast cancer who were younger than 55. Conversely, among women 75 and older, RS testing was associated with a modest increase in chemotherapy use and slightly higher spending. From a population perspective, the impact of RS testing on breast cancer treatment and health care costs is much greater in younger women.

Economic impact of 21-gene recurrence score testing on early-stage breast cancer in Ireland

The 21-gene test is a validated multi-gene diagnostic test that predicts chemotherapy (CT) benefit in oestrogen receptor positive (ER+), lymph node-negative (N0) breast cancer (BC) patients (pts). Ireland was the first public health care system to reimburse this test in Europe. Study objectives were to assess the impact of this test on decision-making and to analyse the economic impact of testing. Between October 2011 and February 2013, a national, retrospective, cross-sectional observational study of ER+, N0 BC pts tested with the 21-gene test was conducted. Surveyed breast medical oncologists, provided the assumption for the decision impact analysis that grade (G) 1 pts would not have received CT before testing and G2/3 pts would have received CT before testing. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed. 592 pts were identified; Low, intermediate and high recurrence score were identified in 53, 36 and 10 % pts, respectively. 384 (70 %) pts had G2, 129 (22 %) G3 and 76 (13 %) G1 tumours. Post testing, 345 pts (59 %) experienced a change in CT decision; 339 changed to hormone therapy alone and 6 advised to receive CT. 172 (30 %) pts received CT, 12 (3.9 %) of pts with low scores, 108 (50.9 %) of intermediate risk and 50 (90.9 %) of pts with high risk scores. Net reduction in CT use was 58 % and net savings achieved were €793,565. Since public reimbursement, the introduction of the 21-gene test has resulted in a significant reduction in chemotherapy administration and cost savings for the Irish public healthcare system.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of Oncotype DX® versus current clinical practice from a Dutch cost perspective

INTRODUCTION

This study analyzes the incremental cost-effectiveness of Oncotype DX(®) testing to support adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations, versus current clinical practice, for patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER(+)), node-negative or micrometastatic (pN1mic) early-stage breast cancer in The Netherlands.

METHODS

Markov model projecting distant recurrence, survival, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and healthcare costs over a 30-year time horizon.

RESULTS

Oncotype DX was projected to increase QALYs by 0.11 (0.07-0.58) and costs with €1236 (range: -€142-€1236) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €11,236/QALY under the most conservative scenario.

CONCLUSION

Reallocation of adjuvant chemotherapy based on Oncotype DX testing is most likely a cost-effective use of scarce resources, improving long-term survival and QALYs at marginal or lower costs.