Quintayo, Mary Anne

Abstract Background: Survivor plots permit adjustment by baseline demographics and clinical characteristics; log-normal survival analysis may be more robust than a Cox model under departures from model assumptions. We depicted distant disease-free survival (DDFS) for statistically standardized quantitated ER, PgR, and HER2. Methods: We utilized CCTG MA.27 (NCT00066573), an adjuvant phase III trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with ER+ and/or PgR+ tumours. IHC ER, PgR, and HER2 HSCORE were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation, and statistically standardized to mean of 0, standard deviation (SD) of 1 following Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER, natural logarithm (ln) and square root for PgR, and ln for HER2. For the ln transformation, 0.1 was added to 0 HSCOREs for a stable transformation. The primary endpoint was DDFS at the longest trial follow-up of 4.1 years. For log-normal survival analysis, ln(time) is a linear function of covariates and had a normal distribution; the Cox models were log-linear for covariates. Survival was depicted with log-normal and Cox survivor plots adjusted at the means of age, T and N stage, grade, lymphovascular invasion, treatment, and baseline patient demographics. We examined ER and PgR ASCO/CAP cut-points at (0; >0), HER2 cut-points at (IHC 0, 0 stain; IHC 0, (0,10%] stain; IHC 1+; IHC 2+; IHC 3+), and ER/PgR/HER2 standardized cut-points at standard deviations about mean of 0 (<-1; (-1,0]; (0,1]; >1). P was based on the likelihood ratio criterion (∼Χ2 (1)) for the addition of ER/PgR/HER2 to the model of baseline covariates, and had nominal significance if P<0.05. Log-normal and Cox multivariable regressions with unstandardized and standardized categorical, and continuous, ER, PgR, and HER2 were adjusted by baseline covariates; 2-sided Wald tests had nominal significance if P<0.05. Results: Of 7576 MA.27 patients, 2325 patients had quantitated image analysis assessments for ER, PgR, and HER2; 113 of 2325 (4.9%) patients experienced a DDFS event during follow-up. Multivariable log-normal survival analysis indicated DDFS was significantly longer for patients with T1 (p=0.01), N0 (p=.002), and grade 1/2 tumors (p=0.01); similar significance levels were found with a Cox model. Log-normal survivor plots were smooth, while Cox survivor plots were step-wise discontinuous at events. Adjusted log-normal survivor plots indicated similar 5-year DDFS for patients by standardized ER categories (p=0.43): 95.4% for those with ER <-1.0 (n=401); 95.8%, for (-1.0,0.0] (n=737); 96.1%, for (0.0,1.0] (n=737); and 96.4%, for >1.0 (n=450). The log-normal standardized PgR survivor plots indicated patients had significantly different 5-year DDFS (p<.001) by categories, with both ln and square root transformations of HSCORE: with a ln transformation, 93.7% for <-1.0 (n=607); 95.4%, for (-1.0,0.0] (n=390); 96.8%, for (0.0,1.0] (n=826); and 97.8%, for >1.0 (n=502). Patients had similar 5-year DDFS by standardized HER2 categories (p=0.71): 96.2% for <-1.0 (n=83); 96.0%, for (-1.0,0.0] (n=1201); 95.9%, for (0.0,1.0] (n=527); and 95.7%, for >1.0 (n=514). In full fit multivariable log-normal survival analyses, DDFS was not significantly different for ER (p=0.51-0.89) and HER2 (p=0.12-0.98); higher PgR was associated with significantly better DDFS (p=0.01 to <.001). Adjusted Cox survival analyses had similar results. Conclusions: Survivor plots adjusted for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics provided similar indications of significance for standardized ER, PgR, and HER2 as those seen in multivariable models with both log-normal and Cox survival analyses. Higher PgR was associated with significantly better DDFS. Citation Format: J. W. Chapman, J. Bayani, S. SenGupta, J. M. S. Bartlett, T. Piper, M. A. Quintayo, S. Virk, P. E. Goss, J. N. Ingle, M. J. Ellis, G. W. Sledge, G. T. Budd, M. Rabaglio, R. H. Ansari, R. Tozer, D. P. D'Souza, H. Chalchal, S. Spadafora, V. Stearns, E. A. Perez, K. A. Gelmon, T. J. Whelan, C. Elliott, L. E. Shepherd, B. E. Chen, K. J. Taylor. Survivor plots for quantitated adjunctive statistically standardized ER, PgR, and HER2 in adjuvant postmenopausal breast cancer: Canadian Cancer Trials Group MA.27 trial of exemestane versus anastrozole [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS3-07-23.

PURPOSE ASCO/College of American Pathologists guidelines recommend reporting estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) as positive with (1%-100%) staining. Statistically standardized quantitated positivity could indicate differential associations of positivity with breast cancer outcomes. METHODS MA.27 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066573 ) was a phase III adjuvant trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Immunochemistry ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation and statistically standardized to mean 0 and standard deviation (SD) 1 after Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, (1) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0%+) and (2) square root. Our primary end point was MA.27 distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at a median 4.1-year follow-up, and secondary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Univariate survival with cut points at SDs about a mean of 0 (≤–1; (–1, 0]; (0, 1]; >1) was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and examined with Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05. RESULTS Of 7,576 women accrued, 3,048 women's tumors had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2,900 (95%) for ER, 2,726 (89%) for PgR, and 2,582 (85% of 3,048) with both ER and PgR. Higher statistically standardized ER and PgR HSCORE and %+ were associated with better univariate DDFS and EFS ( P < .001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated ( P = .52-.88) with DDFS in models with PgR, whereas higher PgR HSCORE and %+ were significantly associated with better DDFS ( P = .001) in models with ER. CONCLUSION Adjunctive statistical standardization differentiated quantitated levels of ER and PgR. Patients with higher ER- and PgR-standardized units had superior DDFS compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ ≤–1.

567 Background: We proposed adjunctive statistical standardization of quantitated ER and PgR to improve inter-laboratory comparability of biomarker results and therapeutic management of breast cancer. Methods: We utilized CCTG MA.27 (NCT00066573), an adjuvant phase III trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with ER+ and/or PgR+ tumours. IHC ER and PgR HSCORE and % positivity (%+) were centrally assessed by machine image quantitation, and each statistically standardized to mean of 0, standard deviation of 1 following Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER; for PgR, 1.) natural logarithm (0.1 added to 0 HSCOREs and 0 %+), 2.) square root. The primary endpoint was STEEP distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at the longest trial follow-up of median 4.1 years; a secondary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). Survival was described with Kaplan-Meier plots and tested with the univariate Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic. We examined cut-points at standard deviations about mean of 0 (<-1; (-1,0]; (0,1]; >1) and explored single cut-points. Cox multivariate regressions were adjusted for age, T and N stage, grade, lymphovascular invasion, treatment, and baseline patient demographics; 2-sided Wald tests had nominal significance if p<0.05. Results: Of the 7576 women accrued, 3048 women had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2900 (95%) for ER; 2726 (89%) for PgR. Statistically standardized HSCORE and %+ units differentiated both univariate DDFS and EFS; DDFS was significantly different by ER levels (p<0.001) and PgR levels (p<0.001). In multivariable assessments, ER HSCORE and %+ were not significantly associated (p=0.52-0.88) with the DDFS primary endpoint in models with PgR, while higher PgR HSCORE and %+ had significantly better DDFS (p=.001, in all instances) in models with ER. Conclusions: DDFS was superior for patients with higher ER and PgR standardized units compared with those with HSCOREs and %+ <-1. The adjunctive statistical standardization of ER and PgR performed here is similar to that mandated for clinical practice by the World Health Organization for BMD. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Adjuvant breast cancer therapy is informed by whether a tumour is positive or negative for the biomarkers ER, PgR, and HER2, often without regard to level of positivity. Quantitation has been proposed to improve therapeutic management. Adjunctive statistical standardization has been proposed to improve inter-laboratory comparability of biomarkers results. Methods: This primary report utilized adjunctive statistical standardization of machine-quantitated image analysis biomarker assessments. CCTG MA.27 (NCT00066573) is an adjuvant phase III trial of exemestane versus anastrozole in postmenopausal women with ER+ and/or PgR+ tumours. IHC ER, PgR, and HER2 were centrally assessed, with FISH (HER2;HER2/CEP17) determinations for equivocal IHC HER2. HSCOREs were statistically standardized to a mean of 0, standard deviation of 1 following Box-Cox variance stabilization transformations of square for ER and natural logarithm for PgR (0.1 was added to 0 HSCOREs). The primary endpoint was STEEP distant disease-free survival (DDFS) at the longest trial follow-up of median 4.1 years. Survival was described with Kaplan-Meier plots. The univariate Wilcoxon (Peto-Prentice) test statistic was used with usual designation of negative/positive (0; &gt;0), and standardized cut-points at standard deviations about mean of 0(&lt;-1; (-1,0]; (0,1]; &gt;1). Cox multivariate regressions adjusted for age, T and N stage, grade, lymphovascular invasion, treatment, and baseline patient demographics, utilized likelihood ratio tests. Nominal significance was p=0.05. Results: Of the 7576 women accrued, 3048 had machine-quantitated image analysis results: 2900 (95%) for ER; 2726 (89%) for PgR. Only 8 women were ASCO/CAP ER- (HSCORE 0); PgR HSCORE was 0 for 533. Statistically standardized units differentiated DDFS ER levels (p&lt; 0.001) and PgR levels (p&lt; 0.001). In adjusted multivariate analyses, higher ER HSCORE was associated with better DDFS (p=0.05) with weak evidence of an association (p=0.11) for standardized HSCORE, and no significant association (respectively, p=0.28, p=0.54) in models with PgR. Higher PgR was associated with better DDFS (p=0.001) in all multivariate assessments, including those with ER. Conclusions: DDFS was superior for patients with higher ER and PgR standardized units compared with those with HSCOREs &lt;-1. Adjunctive statistical standardization, similar to that mandated for clinical practice by the World Health Organization for BMD, should improve inter-laboratory comparability of biomarker results for similar patient populations. Biomarker N DDFS DDFS 5-year (%) 95% CI ER total 2900 ER &lt;-1 506 86 (82, 91) ER (-1, 0] 934 94 (92, 96) ER ( 0, 1] 919 94 (92, 96) ER &gt;1 541 96 (93, 98) PgR total 2726 PgR &lt;-1 734 89 (86, 92) PgR (-1, 0] 439 92 (89, 95) PgR ( 0, 1] 967 95 (93, 96) PgR &gt;1.0 586 98 (97,100) Citation Format: Judy-Anne Chapman, Jane Bayani, Sandip SenGupta, John MS Bartlett, Tammy Piper, Mary Anne Quintayo, Shakeel Virk, Paul Goss, James Ingle, Matthew Ellis, George Sledge Jr, George Budd, Manuela Rabaglio, Rafat Ansari, Richard Tozer, David D'Souza, Haji Chalchal, Silvana Spadafora, Vered Stearns, Edith A. Perez, Karen Gelmon, Timothy Whelan, Catherine Elliott, Lois Shepherd, Bingshu Chen, Karen Taylor. Adjunctive statistical standardization of quantitated machine image analysis of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors: CCTG MA.27 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO1-27-10.