AI Article Synopsis

  • - Early-stage breast cancer (BC) is often curable, but patients may die from causes unrelated to BC, raising questions about how these competing risks affect survival analysis.
  • - A study examined 14 meta-analyses from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), finding that many reports had significant differences, of over 10%, between Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates and adjusted outcomes that consider competing risks.
  • - The findings revealed a considerable average difference (like 28.4% for local recurrence) in risk estimates, suggesting that using Cumulative Incidence Function (CIF) methods may provide more accurate BC-specific outcomes compared to the traditional KM methods when competing risks are present.

Article Abstract

Early-stage breast cancer (BC) is a curable disease with many patients dying of causes other than BC. The influence of non-BC death and other competing risks on the interpretation of Kaplan-Meier (KM)-based analyses for BC-specific outcomes are unknown. We searched the Oxford University website to identify all meta-analyses published by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) between 2005 and 2018. The potential influence of competing risks was estimated using a validated multivariable linear model that predicts the difference between KM and cumulative incidence function (CIF) on estimates of BC-specific outcomes. The initial search identified 14 EBCTCG papers, 10 (71%) reported data on BC and competing events. Eight (80%) had a relative difference between KM and the competing risk adjusted estimates exceeding 10%. The median relative difference was 28.4% for local-recurrence; 16.8% for distant-recurrence, and 6.7% for BC-specific mortality. There was a 18.9% relative difference between KM and CIF adjusted analyses beyond 10 years. The use of KM-based methods when competing risks are present biases risk estimates in studies of early BC especially for uncommon outcomes such as local recurrence. The use of CIF to calculate BC-specific outcomes may be preferable in this setting.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7058037PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61093-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

competing risks
16
breast cancer
12
bc-specific outcomes
12
relative difference
12
influence competing
8
early breast
8
cancer trialists
8
trialists collaborative
8
collaborative group
8
competing
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!