Validation and comparison of models to predict non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients

被引:22
作者
Chen, Kai [1 ]
Zhu, Liling [1 ]
Jia, Weijuan [1 ]
Rao, Nanyan [1 ]
Fan, Miaojing [2 ,3 ]
Huang, Hui [4 ]
Shan, Quanyuan [1 ]
Han, Jingjing [2 ]
Song, Erwei [1 ]
Zeng, Yunjie [2 ]
Su, Fengxi [1 ]
机构
[1] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Breast Tumor Ctr, Dept Breast Surg, Guangzhou 510275, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[2] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Sun Yat Sen Mem Hosp, Dept Pathol, Guangzhou 510275, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[3] Fuyang Peoples Hosp, Dept Pathol, Fuyang, Peoples R China
[4] Jiangmen Matern & Child Healthcare Hosp, Dept Breast Surg, Jiangmen, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
NONSENTINEL AXILLARY NODES; SCORING SYSTEM; BLUE-DYE; BIOPSY; INVOLVEMENT; NOMOGRAM; WOMEN; MULTICENTER; DISSECTION; LIKELIHOOD;
D O I
10.1111/j.1349-7006.2011.02148.x
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Several models for predicting the risk of non-sentinel lymph node (NSLN) metastasis in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) have been developed. The purpose of this study was to validate and compare these models in Chinese patients. A total of 159 breast cancer patients with positive SLNs treated at our institution were included. Among them, 81 (50.9%) patients had at least one NSLN involvement. The Cambridge, Mou, Mayo, Tenon, MDA, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), Ljubljana, SNUH, Turkish, Louisville, Stanford, and Saidi models were evaluated and compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration plots, and false negative (FN) rates. The Cambridge and Mou models outperformed the others, both with area under the ROC curves (AUCs) of 0.73. The Mayo, Tenon, MDA, MSKCC, Turkish, Ljubljana, SNUH, and Louisville models had AUCs of 0.68, 0.66, 0.66, 0.64, 0.63, 0.62, 0.61, and 0.60, respectively. The Stanford and Saidi models did not present any discriminative capabilities, with AUCs of 0.54 and 0.50, respectively. The Cambridge, MSKCC, and Mayo models were well calibrated. With adjusted thresholds, the Mayo model outperformed the others by classifying the highest proportion of patients (20%) into the low-risk group. Our study revealed that the Cambridge and Mou models performed well in Chinese patients. The ROC curves, calibration plots, and FN rates should be used together for the accurate evaluation of prediction models. Selection of these models should be based on the clinicopathological features of the targeted population. The models specifically designed for patients with micrometastases or macrometastases of SLNs are needed in the future. (Cancer Sci 2012; 103: 274281)
引用
收藏
页码:274 / 281
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
[31]   Development and validation of an ultrasonography and clinicopathological features-based nomogram for non-sentinel lymph node metastasis [J].
Chen, Yuxingzi ;
Dai, Yi ;
Chen, Yong ;
Xu, Zheng ;
Ding, Jinhua .
GLAND SURGERY, 2023, 12 (03) :402-414
[32]   Validation of Six Nomograms for Predicting Non-sentinel Lymph Node Metastases in a Dutch Breast Cancer Population [J].
Dingemans, Siem A. ;
de Rooij, Peter D. ;
de Vries, Roos M. van der Vuurst ;
Budel, Leo M. ;
Contant, Caroline M. ;
van der Pool, Anne E. M. .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 23 (02) :477-481
[33]   Non-sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel lymph node: validation of five nomograms and development of a new predictive model [J].
Lombardi, Augusto ;
Maggi, Stefano ;
Lo Russo, Marzia ;
Scopinaro, Francesco ;
Di Stefano, Domenica ;
Pittau, Maria Grazia ;
Tiberi, Simone ;
Amanti, Claudio .
TUMORI, 2011, 97 (06) :749-755
[34]   Validation of online calculators to predict the non-sentinel lymph node status in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients [J].
Satoru Tanaka ;
Nayuko Sato ;
Hiroya Fujioka ;
Yuko Takahashi ;
Kosei Kimura ;
Mitsuhiko Iwamoto .
Surgery Today, 2013, 43 :163-170
[35]   Factors predicting the non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node metastases [J].
Boler, D. E. ;
Uras, C. ;
Ince, U. ;
Cabioglu, N. .
BREAST, 2012, 21 (04) :518-523
[36]   Ljubljana nomograms for predicting the likelihood of non-sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel lymph node [J].
Perhavec, Andraz ;
Perme, Maja Pohar ;
Hocevar, Marko ;
Besic, Nikola ;
Zgajnar, Janez .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2010, 119 (02) :357-366
[37]   A Simple Risk Score to Predict the Presence of Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Metastases in Breast Cancer Patients with a Positive Sentinel Node [J].
van la Parra, Raquel F. D. ;
Peer, Petronella G. M. ;
de Roos, Wilfred K. ;
Ernst, Miranda F. ;
de Wilt, Johannes H. W. ;
Bosscha, Koop .
WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2014, 38 (05) :1070-1076
[38]   Analysis of factors related to non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in 296 sentinel lymph node-positive Chinese breast cancer patients [J].
Maimaitiaili, Amina ;
Wu, Di ;
Liu, Zhenyu ;
Liu, Haimeng ;
Muyiduli, Xiamusiye ;
Fan, Zhimin .
CANCER BIOLOGY & MEDICINE, 2018, 15 (03) :282-289
[39]   A head to head comparison of nine tools predicting non-sentinel lymph node status in sentinel node positive breast cancer women [J].
van den Hoven, Ingrid ;
Kuijt, Gert ;
Roumen, Rudi ;
Voogd, Adri ;
Steyerberg, Ewout W. ;
Vergouwe, Yvonne .
JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 112 (02) :133-138
[40]   Which nomogram is best for predicting non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients? A meta-analysis [J].
Zhu, Liling ;
Jin, Liang ;
Li, Shunrong ;
Chen, Kai ;
Jia, Weijuan ;
Shan, Quanyuan ;
Walter, Stephen ;
Song, Erwei ;
Su, Fengxi .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2013, 137 (03) :783-795