RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Noninvasive Staging of Lymph Node Status (NILS) in Breast Cancer using Machine Learning: External Validation and Further Model Development
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.02.11.23285691
DO 10.1101/2023.02.11.23285691
A1 Hjärtström, M.
A1 Dihge, L.
A1 Bendahl, P. O.
A1 Skarping, I.
A1 Ellbrant, J.
A1 Ohlsson, M.
A1 Rydén, L.
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/02/14/2023.02.11.23285691.abstract
AB Background Most patients diagnosed with breast cancer present with node-negative disease. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routinely used to stage the axilla, leaving patients with healthy axillary lymph nodes without therapeutic effects but at risk of morbidities from the intervention. Numerous studies have developed nodal (N) status prediction models for noninvasive axillary staging using postoperative data or imaging features that are not part of the diagnostic workup. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) is a top-ranked predictor of N metastasis; however, it is challenging to assess preoperatively.Objective To externally validate a multilayer perceptron (MLP) model for noninvasive lymph node staging (NILS) in a large population-based register cohort (n=18 633) while developing a new N MLP in the same cohort. Data were extracted from the Swedish National Quality Register for Breast Cancer (NKBC), 2014–2017, comprising only routinely and preoperatively available documented clinicopathological variables. Furthermore, we aimed to develop and validate an LVI MLP to predict missing values of LVI status to increase the preoperative feasibility of the original NILS model.Methods Three non-overlapping cohorts were used for model development and validation. Four N MLPs and one LVI MLP were developed using 11–12 routinely available predictors.Three N models were used to account for the different availabilities of LVI status in the cohorts and external validation in NKBC. The fourth N model was developed for 80% of NKBC cases (n=14 906) and validated in the remaining 20% (n=3727). Three alternatives for imputing missing values of the LVI status were compared using the LVI model. The discriminatory capacity was evaluated by validation area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) in three of the N models. The clinical feasibility of the models was evaluated using calibration and decision curve analyses.Results External validation of the original NILS model was performed in NKBC (AUC 0.699, 95% CI: 0.690-0.708) with good calibration and the potential of sparing 16% of patients with node-negative disease from SLNB. The LVI model was externally validated (AUC 0.747, 95% CI: 0.694-0.799) with good calibration but did not improve the discriminatory performance of the N models. The new N model was developed in NKBC without information on LVI (AUC 0.709, 95% CI: 0.688-0.729) with excellent calibration in the hold-out internal validation cohort, resulting in the potential omission of 24% of patients from unnecessary SLNB.Conclusions The NILS model was externally validated in NKBC, where the imputation of LVI status did not improve the model’s discriminatory performance. A new N model demonstrated the feasibility of using register data comprising only the variables available in the preoperative setting for NILS using machine learning. Future steps include ongoing preoperative validation of the NILS model and extending the model with, for example, mammography images.Trial Registration Registered in the ISRCTN registry with study ID ISRCTN14341750. Date of registration 23/11/2018.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementLR: The Erling Persson Family Foundation 2018/0410; The Governmental Funding of Clinical Research within the National Health Service (ALF) 2018/40304; The Governmental Funding of Clinical Research within the National Health Service (ALF); The Swedish Cancer Society 2019/0388; The Swedish Research Council 2020/01491; The Swedish Cancer- and Allergy Fund. LD: The Governmental Funding of Clinical Research within the National Health Service (ALF), Young researcher Looket Dihge. IS: The Governmental Funding of Clinical Research within the National Health Service (ALF), Young researcher Ida Skarping. The funding sources had no role in the study design, analyses, data interpretation, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Regional Ethics Committee at Lund University, Sweden, gave ethical approval for the use of Cohort I for this work. The Swedish Ethical Review Authority gave ethical approval of the use of Cohort II and Cohort III for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe raw datasets are available upon reasonable request due to restrictions such as privacy and ethical restrictions.ALNDaxillary lymph node dissectionAUCarea under the receiver operating characteristic curveBMIbody mass indexCESMcontrast-enhanced spectral mammographyCNBcore needle biopsycN0clinically node-negativeERestrogen receptorFNRfalse negative rateLVIlymphovascular invasionMLPmultilayer perceptronMRImagnetic resonance imagingHER2human epidermal growth factor receptor 2NnodalNHGNottingham histological gradeNILSnoninvasive lymph node stagingNKBCSwedish National Quality Register for Breast CancerPADpathological-anatomical diagnosisPRprogesterone receptorROCreceiver operating characteristicSLNBsentinel lymph node biopsySUSSkåne University HospitalSVMsupport vector machineUSultrasound