CanAssist‐Breast (CAB) is an immunohistochemistry (IHC)‐based prognostic test for early‐stage Hormone Receptor (HR+)‐positive breast cancer patients. CAB uses a Support Vector Machine (SVM) trained algorithm which utilizes expression levels of five biomarkers (CD44, ABCC4, ABCC11, N‐Cadherin, and Pan‐Cadherin) and three clinical parameters such as tumor size, grade, and node status as inputs to generate a risk score and categorizes patients as low‐ or high‐risk for distant recurrence within 5 years of diagnosis. In this study, we present clinical validation of CAB. CAB was validated using a retrospective cohort of 857 patients. All patients were treated either with endocrine therapy or chemoendocrine therapy. Risk categorization by CAB was analyzed by calculating Distant Metastasis‐Free Survival (DMFS) and recurrence rates using Kaplan‐Meier survival curves. Multivariate analysis was performed to calculate Hazard ratios (HR) for CAB high‐risk vs low‐risk patients. The results showed that Distant Metastasis‐Free Survival (DMFS) was significantly different (P‐0.002) between low‐ (DMFS: 95%) and high‐risk (DMFS: 80%) categories in the endocrine therapy treated alone subgroup (n = 195) as well as in the total cohort (n = 857, low‐risk DMFS: 95%, high‐risk DMFS: 84%, P < 0.0001). In addition, the segregation of the risk categories was significant (P = 0.0005) in node‐positive patients, with a difference in DMFS of 12%. In multivariate analysis, CAB risk score was the most significant predictor of distant recurrence with hazard ratio of 3.2048 (P < 0.0001). CAB stratified patients into discrete risk categories with high statistical significance compared to Ki‐67 and IHC4 score‐based stratification. CAB stratified a higher percentage of the cohort (82%) as low‐risk than IHC4 score (41.6%) and could re‐stratify >74% of high Ki‐67 and IHC4 score intermediate‐risk zone patients into low‐risk category. Overall the data suggest that CAB can effectively predict risk of distant recurrence with clear dichotomous high‐ or low‐risk categorization.

Use of proteomic strategies to identify a risk classifier that estimates probability of distant recurrence in early-stage hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer is relevant to physiological cellular function and therefore to intrinsic tumor biology. We used a 298-sample retrospective training set to develop an immunohistochemistry-based novel risk classifier called CanAssist-Breast (CAB) which combines 5 prognostically relevant biomarkers and 3 clinico-pathological parameters to arrive at probability of distant recurrence within 5 years from diagnosis. Five selected biomarkers, namely, CD44, ABCC4, ABCC11, N-cadherin, and pan-cadherin, were chosen based on their role in tumor metastasis. The chosen biomarkers represent the hallmarks of cancer and are distinct from other proliferation and gene expression–based prognostic signatures. The 3 clinico-pathological parameters integrated into the machine learning–based CAB algorithm are tumor size, tumor grade, and node status. These features are used to calculate a “CAB risk score” that classifies patients into low- or high-risk groups and predicts probability of distant recurrence in 5 years. Independent clinical validation of CAB in a retrospective study comprising 196 patients indicated that distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was significantly different in the 2 risk groups. The difference in DMFS between the low- and high-risk categories was 19% in the validation cohort (P = .0002). In multivariate analysis, CAB risk score was the most significant independent predictor of distant recurrence with a hazard ratio of 4.3 (P = .0003). CanAssist-Breast is a precise and unique machine learning–based proteomic risk-classifier that can assist in risk stratification of patients with early-stage HR+ breast cancer.

CanAssist-Breast is an immunohistochemistry based test that predicts risk of distant recurrence in early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer patients within first five years of diagnosis. Immunohistochemistry gradings for 5 biomarkers (CD44, ABCC4, ABCC11, N-Cadherin and pan-Cadherins) and 3 clinical parameters (tumor size, tumor grade and node status) of 298 patient cohort were used to develop a machine learning based statistical algorithm. The algorithm generates a risk score based on which patients are stratified into two groups, low- or high-risk for recurrence. The aim of the current study is to demonstrate the analytical performance with respect to repeatability and reproducibility of CanAssist-Breast. All potential sources of variation in CanAssist-Breast testing involving operator, run and observer that could affect the immunohistochemistry performance were tested using appropriate statistical analysis methods for each of the CanAssist-Breast biomarkers using a total 309 samples. The cumulative effect of these variations in the immunohistochemistry gradings on the generation of CanAssist-Breast risk score and risk category were also evaluated. Intra-class Correlation Coefficient, Bland Altman plots and pair-wise agreement were performed to establish concordance on IHC gradings, risk score and risk categorization respectively. CanAssist-Breast test exhibited high levels of concordance on immunohistochemistry gradings for all biomarkers with Intra-class Correlation Coefficient of ≥0.75 across all reproducibility and repeatability experiments. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that agreement on risk scores between the comparators was within acceptable limits. We also observed > 90% agreement on risk categorization (low- or high-risk) across all variables tested. The extensive analytical validation data for the CanAssist-Breast test, evaluating immunohistochemistry performance, risk score generation and risk categorization showed excellent agreement across variables, demonstrating that the test is robust.

Background: Anti-Androgen Receptor (AR) therapy holds promise for a subset of AR expressing triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients. However, current AR assays are suboptimal in detecting the dynamic range of AR expression, contributing to its controversial role in TNBC disease prognosis. This study is aimed at evaluating the feasibility of qRT-PCR to sensitively and robustly detect AR mRNA levels for prognostication. Methods: mRNA expression profiling was performed on FFPE blocks from a retrospective cohort of 101 TNBC patients using qRT-PCR and compared with AR protein expression by immunohistochemistry . Statistical analyses included Spearman’s rank correlation, Chi-square and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Distant Metastasis Free Survival was used as the end point in survival analysis. Results: AR mRNA expression was observed in 34/101 patients (34%) whereas 12/80 cases (15%) were positive by IHC. qRT-PCR could thus detect more AR positive patients as compared to IHC, with 75% (9/12) concordance between the two methods. Co-expression of GATA3 and FOXA1 mRNA was observed in 85 and 88% of AR mRNA positive tumors, respectively. AR mRNA positivity was significantly correlated with age at disease onset (p = 0.02), high FOXA1/GATA3 (p < 0.05) and distant recurrence. AR mRNA positive patients had poorer DMFS (43%; p = 0.002). DMFS dropped further to 26% (p = 0.006) in AR (+)/high FOXA1/GATA3 patients. AR mRNA expression together with node positivity had the worst DMFS (23%; p < 0.0001) compared to patients who were either positive for any one of these, or negative for both AR and node status. Low Ki67 mRNA with AR mRNA positivity also had poorer DMFS (39%; p = 0.001) compared to patients expressing low Ki67 with no AR mRNA expression. Conclusion: qRT-PCR was more sensitive and reliable in detecting the dynamic expression levels of AR compared to IHC and this variation could be explained by the higher sensitivity of the former method. High AR mRNA expression was strongly associated with expression of AR protein, high FOXA1/GATA3 mRNA, and with poor prognosis. qRT-PCR was more efficient in detecting the AR positive cases compared to IHC. A distinct signature involving high GATA3/FOXA1, low Ki67, and node positivity in AR mRNA positive tumors correlated with poor prognosis. Thus, AR mRNA screening can serve as an effective prognostic marker along with offering potential targeted therapy options for TNBC.

Background: CanAssist Breast (CAB) is a prognostic test for early stage hormone receptor‐positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2−) breast cancer patients, validated on Indian and Caucasian patients. The 21‐gene signature Oncotype DX (ODX) is the most widely used commercially available breast cancer prognostic test. In the current study, risk stratification of CAB is compared with that done with ODX along with the respective outcomes of these patients.Methods: A cohort of 109 early stage breast cancer patients who had previously taken the ODX test were retested with CAB, and the results respectively compared with old cut‐offs of ODX as well as cut‐offs suggested by TAILORx, a prospective randomized trial of ODX. Distant metastasis‐free survival after 5 years was taken as the end point.Results: CanAssist Breast stratified 83.5% of the cohort into low‐risk and 16.5% into high‐risk. With the TAILORx cut‐offs, ODX stratified the cohort into 89.9% low‐risk and 10.1% into high‐risk. The low, intermediate, and high‐risk groups with ODX old cut‐offs were 62.4%, 31.2%, and 6.4%, respectively. The overall concordance of CAB with ODX using both cut‐offs is 75%‐76%, with ~82%‐83% concordance in the low‐risk category of these tests. The NPV of the low‐risk category of CAB was 93.4%, and of ODX with TAILORx cut‐offs was 91.8% and 89.7% with old cut‐offs.Conclusions: Compared to the concordance reported for other tests, CAB shows high concordance with ODX, and in addition shows comparable performance in the patient outcomes in this cohort. CAB is thus an excellent and cost‐effective alternative to ODX.

Accurate recurrence risk assessment in hormone receptor positive, HER2/neu negative breast cancer is critical to plan precise therapy. CanAssist Breast (CAB) assesses recurrence risk based on tumor biology using artificial intelligence-based approach. We report CAB risk assessment correlating with disease outcomes in multiple clinically high- and low-risk subgroups. In this retrospective cohort of 925 patients [median age-54 (22-86)] CAB had hazard ratio (HR) of 3 (1.83-5.21) and 2.5 (1.45-4.29), P = 0.0009) in univariate and multivariate analysis. CAB's HR in sub-groups with the other determinants of outcome, T2 (HR: 2.79 (1.49-5.25), P = 0.0001); age [< 50 (HR: 3.14 (1.39-7), P = 0.0008)]. Besides application in node-negative patients, CAB's HR was 2.45 (1.34-4.47), P = 0.0023) in node-positive patients. In clinically low-risk patients (N0 tumors up to 5 cms) (HR: 2.48 (0.79-7.8), P = 0.03) and with luminal-A characteristics (HR: 4.54 (1-19.75), P = 0.004), CAB identified >16% as high-risk with recurrence rates of up to 12%. In clinically high-risk patients (T2N1 tumors (HR: 2.65 (1.31-5.36), P = 0.003; low-risk DMFS: 92.66 ± 1.88) and in women with luminal-B characteristics (HR: 3.24; (1.69-6.22), P < 0.0001; low-risk DMFS: 93.34 ± 1.34)), CAB identified >64% as low-risk. Thus, CAB prognostication was significant in women with clinically low- and high-risk disease. The data imply the use of CAB for providing helpful information to stratify tumors based on biology incorporated with clinical features for Indian patients, which can be extrapolated to regions with similarly characterized patients, South-East Asia.