Advertisement

Clinical and Translational Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 1093–1095 | Cite as

Correction to: Biomarkers in breast cancer: A consensus statement by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and the Spanish Society of Pathology

  • R. Colomer
  • I. Aranda-López
  • J. Albanell
  • T. García-Caballero
  • E. Ciruelos
  • M. Á. López-García
  • J. Cortés
  • F. Rojo
  • M. Martín
  • J. Palacios-Calvo
Correction
  • 418 Downloads

Correction to: Clin Transl Oncol  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-017-1800-5

On page 5 of the article, in the last paragraph of the section “Prognostic genetic platforms: molecular phenotypes and translation to the clinic” a relevant discrepancy between the text and Table 1 could be misunderstood, therefore the paragraph was corrected. The corrected version as well as some changes in Tables 1 and 2 that reflect the updated modifications are shown here:
Table 1

Usage recommendations for different genetic tests as prognostic tools or to establish the benefit of adding chemotherapy to hormone therapy in the management of breast cancer

 

Oncotype DX®

MammaPrint®

Prosigna® (PAM50)

EndoPredict®

ASCO 2017 [1]

Guides the decision to prescribe adjuvant systemic chemotherapy

Evidence: high

Recommendation: strong

May be used in ER/PR positive, HER2 negative, high risk breast cancer

 Node-negative

 Evidence: high

 Recommendation: strong

 Node-positive (1–3 nodes)a

 Evidence: high

 Recommendation: moderate

It should not be used in either ER/PR positive low risk per MINDACT, HER2 positive or triple negative breast cancer

Guides the decision to prescribe adjuvant systemic chemotherapy together with other clinical and pathological variables

Evidence: high

Recommendation: strong

Guides the decision to prescribe adjuvant systemic chemotherapy

Evidence: intermediate

Recommendation: moderate

NCCN 2017 [2]

The only test recommended for patients with > 0.5 cm tumour

Oncotype DX®: can be considered for selecting patients with 1–3 ipsilateral lymph nodes involved

The only test validated for predicting chemotherapy response

Prognostic value, but not validated for predicting chemotherapy response

St Gallen 2017 [3]

Prognostic value and predictive of the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in node-negative tumors. No role in clinical low risk patients, where chemotherapy would not be indicated

SEOM

5-year recurrence risk prognosis: IA/IB

10-year recurrence risk prognosis: IB

Chemotherapy benefit prediction: IA/IB

5-year recurrence risk prognosis: IB

10-year recurrence risk prognosis: –

Chemotherapy benefit prediction: –

5-year recurrence risk prognosis: IB

10-year recurrence risk prognosis: IB

Chemotherapy benefit prediction: –

5-year recurrence risk prognosis: IB

10-year recurrence risk prognosis: IB

Chemotherapy benefit prediction: –

IMPAKT

Little but significant prognostic information above and beyond clinical and pathological parameters. No evidence of clinical usefulness for modifying the treatment decision.

ASCO American Society of Clinical Oncology, IMPAKT improving care and knowledge through translational research in breast cancer, NCCN National Comprehensive Cancer Network, SEOM Spanish Society of Medical Oncology

aPatients should be informed that a benefit of chemotherapy cannot be excluded, particularly in cases > 1 involved axillary nodes

Table 2

Prognostic and predictive value of different genetic tests in breast cancer

 

ASCO 2017 [1]

NCCN 2017 [2]

St Gallen 2017 [3]

SEOM 2015

Prognosis

CT benefit prediction

Prognosis

CT benefit prediction

Prognosis

CT benefit prediction

Prognosis

CT benefit prediction

5 years

10 years

5 years

10 years

5 years

10 years

Oncotype DX®

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

Yes

+++

+++

Yes

IA (low RS)

IB (other RSs)

IB

IA (low RS)

IB (other RSs)

Prosigna®

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

++

++

Yes

IB

IB

NA

MammaPrint®

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

+++

NA

Yes

IB

NA

NA

EndoPredict®

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

++

++

Yes

IB

IB

NA

ASCO American Society of Clinical Oncology, CT chemotherapy, ESMO European Society for Medical Oncology, NA not available, NCCN National Comprehensive Cancer Network, RS Recurrence Score, SEOM Spanish Society of Medical Oncology

The 2017 update of the ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline of Biomarkers use for the adjuvant therapy of breast cancer, focused on the use of MammaPrint®, specified that MammaPrint® may be used in patients with HR+, HER2-negative cases with high clinical risk per MINDACT, either without lymph node involvement or with 1–3 positive nodes, to inform decisions on withholding adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the ASCO guideline warns that these patients should be informed that a benefit of chemotherapy cannot be excluded, particularly in patients with > 1 nodes involved. On the other hand, MammaPrint® does not have a use in either the ER/PR positive low-risk category, in patients with HER2 + or triple-negative breast cancer, according to the guideline [54].

References

  1. 1.
    Krop I, Ismaila N, Andre F, Bast RC, Barlow W, Collyar DE, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(24):2838–47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer Version 4-2017. 2018. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf. Accessed Dec 2017.
  3. 3.
    Curigliano G, Burstein HJ, E PW, Gnant M, Dubsky P, Loibl S, et al. De-escalating and escalating treatments for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2017. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(8):1700–12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Oncología MédicaHospital Universitario La PrincesaMadridSpain
  2. 2.Pathology DepartmentGeneral University Hospital of AlicanteAlicanteSpain
  3. 3.Medical Oncology Department, Mar University Hospital, Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM)Pompeu Fabra University, CIBERONCBarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.Pathology DepartmentUniversity Hospital Complex of SantiagoSantiago de CompostelaSpain
  5. 5.Medical Oncology DepartmentDoce de Octubre University HospitalMadridSpain
  6. 6.Pathology Department, Virgen del Rocio University HospitalCIBERONCSevilleSpain
  7. 7.Medical Oncology DepartmentRamón y Cajal University HospitalMadridSpain
  8. 8.Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO)BarcelonaSpain
  9. 9.Baselga Institute of Oncology (IOB)MadridSpain
  10. 10.Pathology DepartmentFundación Jiménez Díaz University HospitalMadridSpain
  11. 11.Medical Oncology DepartmentGregorio Marañón University Hospital, CIBERONC, GEICAMMadridSpain
  12. 12.Pathology DepartmentRamón y Cajal University Hospital, CIBERONC, IRYCIS and University of AlcaláMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations