Comparison of the efficacy and construction of prediction model for relapse free survival in breast cancer based on diabetes mellitus type 2
10.3760/cma.j.cn371439-20240716-00050
- VernacularTitle:基于2型糖尿病的乳腺癌患者无复发生存预测模型构建与效能比较
- Author:
Wenkao ZHOU
1
;
Hesen HUANG
;
Yimei PAN
;
Lingyan HUANG
;
Mingshan WANG
;
Fangli ZHAO
;
Ya WANG
;
Huimin TANG
Author Information
1. 厦门大学附属翔安医院急诊医学科，厦门 361001
- Keywords:
Breast neoplasms;
Diabetes mellitus, type 2;
Relapse free survival;
Nomograms;
Dual models
- From:
Journal of International Oncology
2025;52(5):295-303
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To construct univariate and multivariate relapse free survival (RFS) prediction models for breast cancer patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2DM) and to compare and select the model with higher predictive performance.Methods:A total of 912 breast cancer patients treated at the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University from January 2010 to December 2016 were included, of which 202 patients had T2DM and 710 patients did not. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was drawn based on whether patients had T2DM, and log-rank test was performed based on whether patients had T2DM. All patients were randomly divided into a training set ( n=640) and a validation set ( n=272) at a ratio of 7∶3. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional risk regression models were used to analyze RFS in breast cancer patients with the survival package. The "rms" package was employed to construct univariate and multivariate RFS prediction models for breast cancer patients with T2DM. Clinical decision curves and calibration curves were used to validate the models. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was used to compare and analyze the prediction performance of the two models. Results:There were no statistically significant differences between the training set and the validation set patients in terms of age, T2DM, surgical approach, axillary management methods, T stage, N stage, molecular sub-type, estrogen receptor (ER) 1, ER2, progesterone receptor (PR) , ER and PR consistency, Ki67, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) (all P>0.05) . There was a statistically significant difference in histological grade ( χ2=7.59, P=0.022) . Survival analysis showed that the 5-year RFS rate was 83.7% in patients with T2DM and 92.3% in patients without T2DM ( χ2=16.61, P<0.001) . Univariate analysis revealed that age ( HR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.03-1.06, P<0.001) , T2DM ( HR=2.31, 95% CI: 1.49-3.55, P<0.001) , surgical approach ( HR=2.39, 95% CI: 1.20-4.77, P=0.013) , axillary management methods ( HR=2.62, 95% CI: 1.72-3.98, P<0.001) , T stage (T 2: HR=2.13, 95% CI: 1.36-3.31, P<0.001; T 3: HR=6.90, 95% CI: 3.35-14.22, P<0.001) , N stage (N 2: HR=3.87, 95% CI: 2.12-7.07, P<0.001; N 3: HR=8.61, 95% CI: 4.71-15.75, P<0.001) , molecular sub-type (Luminal B: HR=2.74, 95% CI: 1.17-6.36, P=0.019; HER2 +: HR=3.64, 95% CI: 1.38-9.58, P=0.009; TNBC: HR=4.40, 95% CI: 1.71-11.34, P=0.002) , ER1 (>10%: HR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.37-0.90, P=0.016) , ER2 ( HR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.37-0.89, P=0.015) , and PR ( HR=0.56, 95% CI: 0.37-0.86, P=0.008) were all factors influencing RFS in breast cancer patients. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age ( HR=1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.06, P<0.001) , T2DM ( HR=1.82, 95% CI: 1.16-2.85, P=0.009) , T stage (T 2: HR=1.60, 95% CI: 1.01-2.54, P=0.046; T 3: HR=2.64, 95% CI: 1.22-5.72, P=0.014) , N stage (N 2: HR=3.72, 95% CI: 2.01-6.88, P<0.001; N 3: HR=5.34, 95% CI: 2.78-10.25, P<0.001) , and ER1 (>10%: HR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.39-0.99, P=0.046) were independent factors influencing RFS in breast cancer patients. Based on the 10 and 5 variables with P<0.05 in the univariate and multivariate analyses respectively, the nomograms of the univariate and multivariate prediction models were constructed to evaluate the influence of factors such as T2DM on the postoperative RFS of breast cancer patients. Clinical decision curves and calibration curves indicated that both models had high predictive value for RFS in breast cancer patients, and the predictive results were highly consistent with the actual observed results. ROC curve analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the area under the curve (AUC) of the two models for predicting the RFS rates of breast cancer patients in the training set and validation set at 36, 60, and 84 months (all P>0.05) , indicating that the predictive efficacy of the two models was comparable. The multivariate model is more suitable for clinical application because it uses fewer variables. Conclusions:Breast cancer patients with T2DM have poorer prognosis. Age, T2DM, T stage, N stage, and ER1 are independent factors influencing postoperative RFS in breast cancer patients. The multi-factor prediction model of RFS in breast cancer patients based on T2DM is more suitable for clinical application due to its higher predictive efficacy and fewer variables.
