Personalized Decision Making on Genomic Testing in Early Breast Cancer: Expanding the MINDACT Trial with Decision-Analytic Modeling

Ewout W. Steyerberg, Liesbeth C. de Wreede, David van Klaveren and Patrick M. M. Bossuyt
Additional contact information
Ewout W. Steyerberg: Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Liesbeth C. de Wreede: Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
David van Klaveren: Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Patrick M. M. Bossuyt: Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Medical Decision Making, 2021, vol. 41, issue 3, 354-365

Abstract: Background Genomic tests may improve upon clinical risk estimation with traditional prognostic factors. We aimed to explore how evidence on the prognostic strength of a genomic signature (clinical validity) can contribute to individualized decision making on starting chemotherapy for women with breast cancer (clinical utility). Methods The MINDACT trial was a randomized trial that enrolled 6693 women with early-stage breast cancer. A 70-gene signature (Mammaprint) was used to estimate genomic risk, and clinical risk was estimated by a dichotomized version of the Adjuvant!Online risk calculator. Women with discordant risk results were randomized to the use of chemotherapy. We simulated the full risk distribution of these women and estimated individual benefit, assuming a constant relative effect of chemotherapy. Results The trial showed a prognostic effect of the genomic signature (adjusted hazard ratio 2.4). A decision-analytic modeling approach identified far fewer women as candidates for genetic testing (4% rather than 50%) and fewer benefiting from chemotherapy (3% rather than 27%) as compared with the MINDACT trial report. The selection of women benefitting from genetic testing and chemotherapy depended strongly on the required benefit from treatment and the assumed therapeutic effect of chemotherapy. Conclusions A high-quality pragmatic trial was insufficient to directly inform clinical practice on the utility of a genomic test for individual women. The indication for genomic testing may be far more limited than suggested by the MINDACT trial.

Keywords: biomarker evaluation; breast cancer; clinical utility; genomic testing; risk stratification (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X21991173 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:41:y:2021:i:3:p:354-365

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X21991173

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().