Validation of an Abridged Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model for the General Population

被引:5
作者
Spaeth, Erika L. [1 ,4 ]
Dite, Gillian S. [2 ]
Hopper, John L. [3 ]
Allman, Richard [2 ]
机构
[1] Phenogen Sci Inc, Charlotte, NC USA
[2] Genet Technol Ltd, Fitzroy, Vic, Australia
[3] Univ Melbourne, Ctr Epidemiol & Biostat, Melbourne Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Parkville, Vic, Australia
[4] Phenogen Sci, 1300 Baxter St STE 255, Charlotte, NC 28204 USA
关键词
FAMILIAL BREAST; WOMEN; SUSCEPTIBILITY; PROBABILITIES; RALOXIFENE; TAMOXIFEN; SNPS;
D O I
10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-22-0460
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Accurate breast cancer risk prediction could improve risk -reduction paradigms if thoughtfully used in clinical practice. Identification of at-risk women is the first step in tailoring risk screening and risk-reduction protocols to women's needs. Using the UK Biobank, we validated a simple risk model to predict breast cancer risk in the general population. Our simple breast cancer risk (BRISK) model integrates a combination of impactful breast cancer-associated risk factors including extended family history and polygenic risk allowing for the removal of moderate factors cur-rently found in comprehensive traditional models. Using two versions of BRISK, differing by 77-single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) versus 313-SNP polygenic risk score integration, we found improved discrimination and risk categorization of both BRISK models compared with one the most well-known models, the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BRCAT). Over a 5-year period, at-risk women classified >= 3% 5-year risk by BRISK had a 1.829 (95% CI = 1.710-1.956) times increased incidence of breast cancer compared with the population, which was higher than the 1.413 (95% CI = 1.217-1.640) times increased incidence for women classified >= 3% by BCRAT. Prevention Relevance: In this prospective population -based cohort study, we show the improved performance of a new risk assessment model compared with a gold-standard model (BCRAT). The classification of at-risk women using this new model highlights the opportunity to improve risk stratification and implement existing clinical risk-reduction interventions.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 291
页数:11
相关论文
共 63 条
  • [1] Validation of a breast cancer risk prediction model based on the key risk factors: family history, mammographic density and polygenic risk
    Allman, Richard
    Mu, Yi
    Dite, Gillian S.
    Spaeth, Erika
    Hopper, John L.
    Rosner, Bernard A.
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2023, 198 (02) : 335 - 347
  • [2] A streamlined model for use in clinical breast cancer risk assessment maintains predictive power and is further improved with inclusion of a polygenic risk score
    Allman, Richard
    Spaeth, Erika
    Lai, John
    Gross, Susan J.
    Hopper, John L.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (01):
  • [3] SNPs and breast cancer risk prediction for African American and Hispanic women
    Allman, Richard
    Dite, Gillian S.
    Hopper, John L.
    Gordon, Ora
    Starlard-Davenport, Athena
    Chlebowski, Rowan
    Kooperberg, Charles
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2015, 154 (03) : 583 - 589
  • [4] Familial breast and ovarian cancer:: A Swedish population-based register study
    Anderson, H
    Bladström, A
    Olsson, H
    Möller, TR
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 152 (12) : 1154 - 1163
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2022, NCCNClinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCNGuidelines). Hodgkin lymphoma
  • [6] The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions
    Antoniou, A. C.
    Cunningham, A. P.
    Peto, J.
    Evans, D. G.
    Lalloo, F.
    Narod, S. A.
    Risch, H. A.
    Eyfjord, J. E.
    Hopper, J. L.
    Southey, M. C.
    Olsson, H.
    Johannsson, O.
    Borg, A.
    Passini, B.
    Radice, P.
    Manoukian, S.
    Eccles, D. M.
    Tang, N.
    Olah, E.
    Anton-Culver, H.
    Warner, E.
    Lubinski, J.
    Gronwald, J.
    Gorski, B.
    Tryggvadottir, L.
    Syrjakoski, K.
    Kallioniemi, O-P
    Eerola, H.
    Nevanlinna, H.
    Pharoah, P. D. P.
    Easton, D. F.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2008, 98 (08) : 1457 - 1466
  • [7] Evaluating clinician acceptability of the prototype CanRisk tool for predicting risk of breast and ovarian cancer: A multi-methods study
    Archer, Stephanie
    de Villiers, Chantal Babb
    Scheibl, Fiona
    Carver, Tim
    Hartley, Simon
    Lee, Andrew
    Cunningham, Alex P.
    Easton, Douglas F.
    McIntosh, Jennifer G.
    Emery, Jon
    Tischkowitz, Marc
    Antoniou, Antonis C.
    Walter, Fiona M.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (03):
  • [8] Breast cancer chemoprevention: An update on current practice and opportunities for primary care physicians
    Ball, Somedeb
    Arevalo, Meily
    Juarez, Edna
    Payne, J. Drew
    Jones, Catherine
    [J]. PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2019, 129
  • [9] Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58 209 women with breast cancer and 101 986 women without the disease
    Beral, V
    Bull, D
    Doll, R
    Peto, R
    Reeves, G
    [J]. LANCET, 2001, 358 (9291) : 1389 - 1399
  • [10] Mammographic density adds accuracy to both the Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail breast cancer risk models in a prospective UK screening cohort
    Brentnall, Adam R.
    Harkness, Elaine F.
    Astley, Susan M.
    Donnelly, Louise S.
    Stavrinos, Paula
    Sampson, Sarah
    Fox, Lynne
    Sergeant, Jamie C.
    Harvie, Michelle N.
    Wilson, Mary
    Beetles, Ursula
    Gadde, Soujanya
    Lim, Yit
    Jain, Anil
    Bundred, Sara
    Barr, Nicola
    Reece, Valerie
    Howell, Anthony
    Cuzick, Jack
    Evans, D. Gareth R.
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2015, 17