Abstract P2-08-36: Comparing prognostic performance of different lymph node staging systems among patients with breast cancer
Authors: Gong Y , Ji P , Jiang Y-Z , Hu X , Shao Z-M 
Published: May 2019

Abstract
Background: Metastatic regional lymph nodes (LN) is a strong predictor of worse long-term outcome after resection of breast cancer. This study aimed to compare the prognostic performance of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) N stage relative to lymph node ratio (LNR), log odds of metastatic lymph nodes (LODDS), number of removed lymph nodes (NRLNs), and number of negative lymph nodes (NNLNs) in breast cancer patients.
Methods: All of the breast cancer patients who underwent surgery between 2004 and 2012 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Restricted cubic spline functions were used to characterize the association between continuous variables and the risk of death and determine the optimal cut-off points. The Cox proportional hazards models were constructed, and the relative discriminative abilities of the different LN staging systems were assessed using the Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) and the Harrell's concordance index (C-index).
Results: A total of 264,096 breast cancer patients were enrolled, and 177,598 (67.2%) had no lymph node metastasis, whereas 86,498 (32.8%) had lymph node metastasis. 187,785 (71.1%) patients had a limited number of LNs harvested (NRLN &lt;10). The median follow-up time was 73 months, and the 8-year overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were 82.6% and 90.4%, respectively. LNR, LODDS, NRLNs, and NNLNs were all nonlinearly associated with OS and BCSS. Patients with metastatic LN had an increased risk of OS (hazards ratio: 2.32, 95% confidence interval: 2.27–2.37; P &lt; 0.001) and BCSS (hazards ratio: 4.53, 95% confidence interval: 4.40–4.66; P &lt; 0.001). When LNR was equal to 0 or 1, there was a heterogeneity of outcomes, and LODDS still yielded informative values compared to LNR. Among the entire cohort, LNR modeled as a continuous variable had a somewhat better prognostic performance (AIC: 923231.4 and C-index: 0.722 for OS; AIC: 482962.3 and C-index: 0.817 for BCSS) than any of other LN staging systems. However, a model with AJCC N stage showed the best fit in patients with a limited number of LNs harvested (AIC: 501321.8 and C-index: 0.699 for OS; AIC: 212605.6 and C-index: 0.809 for BCSS). When assessed among patients with metastatic LN, LODDS outperformed other staging systems including AJCC N stage, LNR, NRLNs and NNLNs, whenever assessed using continuous (AIC: 428626.2 and C index: 0.728 for OS; AIC: 296886.8 and C index: 0.770 for BCSS) or categorical (AIC: 429527.5 and C index: 0.722 for OS; AIC: 297796.6 and C index: 0.762 for BCSS) cutoff values.
Conclusions: Although LNR assessed as a continuous variable was the most potent method to stratify patients regardless of LN status, the prognostic superiority of LNR is confounded by a limited LN harvest. LODDS was a better and more powerful predictor of survival when patients were LN positive, especially among those patients with either very low or high LNR.
Citation Format: Gong Y, Ji P, Jiang Y-Z, Hu X, Shao Z-M. Comparing prognostic performance of different lymph node staging systems among patients with breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-08-36.