Gill, Stan

4044 Background: To aid in decisions regarding adjuvant therapy (AT) for resected high-risk CC, two prog models are in common use: the Mayo Clinic NUM calculator developed from a pooled data analysis of 7 randomized 5FU-based AT trials, and ADJ! developed using SEER data. This study examines the accuracy of NUM and ADJ! utilizing a cohort of patients (pts) referred to the BC Cancer Agency (BCCA). Methods: Demographic, disease and treatment data for pts with stage II/III CC referred to the BCCA from 1995–1996 + 1999–2003 were collected. Observed (obs) 5-year relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared to predicted estimates (pred) using NUM and ADJ!, both overall and for all prog subgroups with ≥ 10pts, as stratified by T stage, N stage, tumor grade and age. Data are presented in a descriptive manner and using confidence intervals. Results: Median follow-up was 5.6 yrs for 2,033 pts - 53% male, median age 68y, 40% N0. The mean percentages of 5 year pred outcomes for each of the two models and the actual Kaplan Meier mean survivals are presented in the table . The percentage correct predictions of 5 y status is also presented, with correctness deemed accurate if the pt was alive and predicted to be alive by ≥ 50% as determined by each model or dead while the respective tool predicted < 50% possibility of being alive. For surgery alone pts, ADJ!pred were more often closer to what was observed, as compared to NUMpred, in the prog subgroups (for RFS 56%, OS 88%). For surgery + 5-FU pts, within these subgroups, NUMpred were more often closer to what was observed, as compared to ADJ!pred, for RFS (62%) and for OS (55%). Conclusions: In this independent population-based validation, NUM and ADJ! have acceptable and similar reliability with modest over-estimations of 5y RFS and OS. Both models thus appear to be useful adjuvant decision-aids. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.