PROGNOSTICATION OF BREAST CANCER BY MULTIVARIATE METHODS.
Yrjö U. Collan, Teijo Kuopio, Annika Auranen, Mikko I. Linna
Abstract
Yrjö U. Collan, Teijo Kuopio, Annika Auranen, Mikko I. Linna
Abstract
Three multivariate prognostic models based on Cox's regression were tested in terms of how they predicted prognosis in a material of 134 patients with breast cancer. The multivariate models all incorporated tumor size, mitotic activity index (MAI), and axillary lymph node status in their formulas, and were originally produced through studies on different patient materials. The predictive behavior of MAI was also tested separately in the same material. The multivariate models gave roughly parallel predicted percentages of survival at two years (CV=5.2%), but showed clearly greater variation later (12.3% and 24.4% at 5 and 9 years, respectively). The results were more uniform between the multivariate models, than between the prediction by MAI and the multivariate models. The variation between repeated estimates was smaller within multivariate models than within the estimation of one of their components (MAI). We found the use of the multivariate models easy. However, traditional hospital practice does not necessarily favor the use of multivariate models, although they seem to group patients more reliably than single prognostic features.
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Three multivariate prognostic models based on Cox's regression were tested in terms of how they predicted prognosis in a material of 134 patients with breast cancer. The multivariate models all incorporated tumor size, mitotic activity index (MAI), and axillary lymph node status in their formulas, and were originally produced through studies on different patient materials. The predictive behavior of MAI was also tested separately in the same material. The multivariate models gave roughly parallel predicted percentages of survival at two years (CV=5.2%), but showed clearly greater variation later (12.3% and 24.4% at 5 and 9 years, respectively). The results were more uniform between the multivariate models, than between the prediction by MAI and the multivariate models. The variation between repeated estimates was smaller within multivariate models than within the estimation of one of their components (MAI). We found the use of the multivariate models easy. However, traditional hospital practice does not necessarily favor the use of multivariate models, although they seem to group patients more reliably than single prognostic features.
Key concepts: Multivariate statistics, Multivariate analysis, Breast cancer, Bayesian multivariate linear regression, Proportional hazards model, Statistics, Multivariate analysis of variance, Univariate