Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic

Andrea E Wahner Hendrickson, Kieran M. Hawthorne, Ellen L. Goode, Kimberly R. Kalli, Krista M. Goergen, Jamie N. Bakkum-Gamez, William A. Cliby, Gary L. Keeney, Daniel W. Visscher, Yaman Tarabishy, Ann L. Oberg, Lynn C. Hartmann, Matthew J. Maurer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is an aggressive disease inwhich first line therapy consists of a surgical staging/debulking procedure and platinum based chemotherapy. There is significant interest in clinically applicable, easy to use prognostic tools to estimate risk of recurrence and overall survival. In this study we used a large prospectively collected cohort ofwomenwith EOC to validate currently published models and assess prognostic variables. Methods. Women with invasive ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 and prospectively enrolled into the Mayo Clinic Ovarian Cancer registry were identified. Demographics and known prognostic markers as well as epidemiologic exposure variables were abstracted from the medical record and collected via questionnaire. Six previously published models of overall and recurrence-free survival were assessed for external validity. In addition, predictors of outcome were assessed in our dataset. Results. Previously published models validated with a range of c-statistics (0.587-0.827), though application of models containing variables which are not part of routine practice were somewhat limited by missing data; utilization of all applicable models and comparison of results are suggested. Examination of prognostic variables identified only the presence of ascites and ASA score to be independent predictors of prognosis in our dataset, albeit with marginal gain in prognostic information, after accounting for stage and debulking. Conclusions. Existing prognosticmodels for newly diagnosed EOC showed acceptable calibration in our cohort for clinical application. However, modeling of prospective variables in our dataset reiterates that stage and debulking remains the most important predictors of prognosis in this setting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)77-85
Number of pages9
JournalGynecologic Oncology
Volume137
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Fallopian Tube Neoplasms
Recurrence
Survival
Platinum
Ascites
Ovarian Neoplasms
Calibration
Medical Records
Registries
Demography
Drug Therapy
Datasets
Ovarian epithelial cancer
Therapeutics
Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Model
  • Nomogram
  • Ovarian
  • Prognostic
  • Validation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Hendrickson, A. E. W., Hawthorne, K. M., Goode, E. L., Kalli, K. R., Goergen, K. M., Bakkum-Gamez, J. N., ... Maurer, M. J. (2015). Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic. Gynecologic Oncology, 137(1), 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.539

Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic. / Hendrickson, Andrea E Wahner; Hawthorne, Kieran M.; Goode, Ellen L.; Kalli, Kimberly R.; Goergen, Krista M.; Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie N.; Cliby, William A.; Keeney, Gary L.; Visscher, Daniel W.; Tarabishy, Yaman; Oberg, Ann L.; Hartmann, Lynn C.; Maurer, Matthew J.

In: Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 137, No. 1, 2015, p. 77-85.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hendrickson, AEW, Hawthorne, KM, Goode, EL, Kalli, KR, Goergen, KM, Bakkum-Gamez, JN, Cliby, WA, Keeney, GL, Visscher, DW, Tarabishy, Y, Oberg, AL, Hartmann, LC & Maurer, MJ 2015, 'Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic', Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 137, no. 1, pp. 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.539
Hendrickson AEW, Hawthorne KM, Goode EL, Kalli KR, Goergen KM, Bakkum-Gamez JN et al. Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic. Gynecologic Oncology. 2015;137(1):77-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.539
Hendrickson, Andrea E Wahner ; Hawthorne, Kieran M. ; Goode, Ellen L. ; Kalli, Kimberly R. ; Goergen, Krista M. ; Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie N. ; Cliby, William A. ; Keeney, Gary L. ; Visscher, Daniel W. ; Tarabishy, Yaman ; Oberg, Ann L. ; Hartmann, Lynn C. ; Maurer, Matthew J. / Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic. In: Gynecologic Oncology. 2015 ; Vol. 137, No. 1. pp. 77-85.
@article{68cc0af0e91d4773a97a96e34450c245,
title = "Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic",
abstract = "Objectives. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is an aggressive disease inwhich first line therapy consists of a surgical staging/debulking procedure and platinum based chemotherapy. There is significant interest in clinically applicable, easy to use prognostic tools to estimate risk of recurrence and overall survival. In this study we used a large prospectively collected cohort ofwomenwith EOC to validate currently published models and assess prognostic variables. Methods. Women with invasive ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 and prospectively enrolled into the Mayo Clinic Ovarian Cancer registry were identified. Demographics and known prognostic markers as well as epidemiologic exposure variables were abstracted from the medical record and collected via questionnaire. Six previously published models of overall and recurrence-free survival were assessed for external validity. In addition, predictors of outcome were assessed in our dataset. Results. Previously published models validated with a range of c-statistics (0.587-0.827), though application of models containing variables which are not part of routine practice were somewhat limited by missing data; utilization of all applicable models and comparison of results are suggested. Examination of prognostic variables identified only the presence of ascites and ASA score to be independent predictors of prognosis in our dataset, albeit with marginal gain in prognostic information, after accounting for stage and debulking. Conclusions. Existing prognosticmodels for newly diagnosed EOC showed acceptable calibration in our cohort for clinical application. However, modeling of prospective variables in our dataset reiterates that stage and debulking remains the most important predictors of prognosis in this setting.",
keywords = "Model, Nomogram, Ovarian, Prognostic, Validation",
author = "Hendrickson, {Andrea E Wahner} and Hawthorne, {Kieran M.} and Goode, {Ellen L.} and Kalli, {Kimberly R.} and Goergen, {Krista M.} and Bakkum-Gamez, {Jamie N.} and Cliby, {William A.} and Keeney, {Gary L.} and Visscher, {Daniel W.} and Yaman Tarabishy and Oberg, {Ann L.} and Hartmann, {Lynn C.} and Maurer, {Matthew J.}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.539",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "137",
pages = "77--85",
journal = "Gynecologic Oncology",
issn = "0090-8258",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of published models and prognostic variables in epithelial ovarian cancer at Mayo Clinic

AU - Hendrickson, Andrea E Wahner

AU - Hawthorne, Kieran M.

AU - Goode, Ellen L.

AU - Kalli, Kimberly R.

AU - Goergen, Krista M.

AU - Bakkum-Gamez, Jamie N.

AU - Cliby, William A.

AU - Keeney, Gary L.

AU - Visscher, Daniel W.

AU - Tarabishy, Yaman

AU - Oberg, Ann L.

AU - Hartmann, Lynn C.

AU - Maurer, Matthew J.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Objectives. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is an aggressive disease inwhich first line therapy consists of a surgical staging/debulking procedure and platinum based chemotherapy. There is significant interest in clinically applicable, easy to use prognostic tools to estimate risk of recurrence and overall survival. In this study we used a large prospectively collected cohort ofwomenwith EOC to validate currently published models and assess prognostic variables. Methods. Women with invasive ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 and prospectively enrolled into the Mayo Clinic Ovarian Cancer registry were identified. Demographics and known prognostic markers as well as epidemiologic exposure variables were abstracted from the medical record and collected via questionnaire. Six previously published models of overall and recurrence-free survival were assessed for external validity. In addition, predictors of outcome were assessed in our dataset. Results. Previously published models validated with a range of c-statistics (0.587-0.827), though application of models containing variables which are not part of routine practice were somewhat limited by missing data; utilization of all applicable models and comparison of results are suggested. Examination of prognostic variables identified only the presence of ascites and ASA score to be independent predictors of prognosis in our dataset, albeit with marginal gain in prognostic information, after accounting for stage and debulking. Conclusions. Existing prognosticmodels for newly diagnosed EOC showed acceptable calibration in our cohort for clinical application. However, modeling of prospective variables in our dataset reiterates that stage and debulking remains the most important predictors of prognosis in this setting.

AB - Objectives. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is an aggressive disease inwhich first line therapy consists of a surgical staging/debulking procedure and platinum based chemotherapy. There is significant interest in clinically applicable, easy to use prognostic tools to estimate risk of recurrence and overall survival. In this study we used a large prospectively collected cohort ofwomenwith EOC to validate currently published models and assess prognostic variables. Methods. Women with invasive ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 and prospectively enrolled into the Mayo Clinic Ovarian Cancer registry were identified. Demographics and known prognostic markers as well as epidemiologic exposure variables were abstracted from the medical record and collected via questionnaire. Six previously published models of overall and recurrence-free survival were assessed for external validity. In addition, predictors of outcome were assessed in our dataset. Results. Previously published models validated with a range of c-statistics (0.587-0.827), though application of models containing variables which are not part of routine practice were somewhat limited by missing data; utilization of all applicable models and comparison of results are suggested. Examination of prognostic variables identified only the presence of ascites and ASA score to be independent predictors of prognosis in our dataset, albeit with marginal gain in prognostic information, after accounting for stage and debulking. Conclusions. Existing prognosticmodels for newly diagnosed EOC showed acceptable calibration in our cohort for clinical application. However, modeling of prospective variables in our dataset reiterates that stage and debulking remains the most important predictors of prognosis in this setting.

KW - Model

KW - Nomogram

KW - Ovarian

KW - Prognostic

KW - Validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933181864&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84933181864&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.539

DO - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.539

M3 - Article

C2 - 25620544

AN - SCOPUS:84933181864

VL - 137

SP - 77

EP - 85

JO - Gynecologic Oncology

JF - Gynecologic Oncology

SN - 0090-8258

IS - 1

ER -