A comparison between different prediction models for invasive breast cancer occurrence in the French E3N cohort

被引:14
作者
Dartois, Laureen [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Gauthier, Emilien [4 ]
Heitzmann, Julia [4 ]
Baglietto, Laura [5 ,6 ]
Michiels, Stefan [2 ,7 ]
Mesrine, Sylvie [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Boutron-Ruault, Marie-Christine [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Delaloge, Suzette [8 ]
Ragusa, Stephane [4 ]
Clavel-Chapelon, Francoise [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Fagherazzi, Guy [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Res Epidemiol & Populat Hlth CESP, INSERM, U1018, Team 9, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[2] Univ Paris 11, UMRS 1018, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[3] Gustave Roussy, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[4] Statlife, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[5] Canc Council Victoria, Canc Epidemiol Ctr, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[6] Univ Melbourne, Ctr Mol Environm Genet & Analyt Epidemiol, Sch Populat Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[7] Gustave Roussy, Serv Biostat & Epidemiol, F-94805 Villejuif, France
[8] Gustave Roussy, Dept Med Oncol, F-94805 Villejuif, France
关键词
Breast cancer; Women; Risk score; Proportional hazard Cox regression; Nearest-neighbor algorithm; Discrimination; Calibration; Postmenopausal women; Premenopausal women; Menopausal status; Gail model; RISK-PREDICTION; GAIL MODEL; EXTERNAL VALIDATION; WOMEN; POPULATION; AGE; ESTROGEN; EPIDEMIOLOGY; PERFORMANCE; DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1007/s10549-015-3321-7
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Breast cancer remains a global health concern with a lack of high discriminating prediction models. The k-nearest-neighbor algorithm (kNN) estimates individual risks using an intuitive tool. This study compares the performances of this approach with the Cox and the Gail models for the 5-year breast cancer risk prediction. The study included 64,995 women from the French E3N prospective cohort. The sample was divided into a learning (N = 51,821) series to learn the models using fivefold cross-validation and a validation (N = 13,174) series to evaluate them. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the expected over observed number of cases (E/O) ratio were estimated. In the two series, 393 and 78 premenopausal and 537 and 98 postmenopausal breast cancers were diagnosed. The discrimination values of the best combinations of predictors obtained from cross-validation ranged from 0.59 to 0.60. In the validation series, the AUC values in premenopausal and postmenopausal women were 0.583 [0.520; 0.646] and 0.621 [0.563; 0.679] using the kNN and 0.565 [0.500; 0.631] and 0.617 [0.561; 0.673] using the Cox model. The E/O ratios were 1.26 and 1.28 in premenopausal women and 1.44 and 1.40 in postmenopausal women. The applied Gail model provided AUC values of 0.614 [0.554; 0.675] and 0.549 [0.495; 0.604] and E/O ratios of 0.78 and 1.12. This study shows that the prediction performances differed according to menopausal status when using parametric statistical tools. The k-nearest-neighbor approach performed well, and discrimination was improved in postmenopausal women compared with the Gail model.
引用
收藏
页码:415 / 426
页数:12
相关论文
共 65 条
[61]   Estimation of individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for Japanese women [J].
Kimiko Ueda ;
Hideaki Tsukuma ;
Hideo Tanaka ;
Wakiko Ajiki ;
Akira Oshima .
Breast Cancer, 2003, 10 (1) :54-62
[62]   Genome-Based Prediction of Breast Cancer Risk in the General Population: A Modeling Study Based on Meta-Analyses of Genetic Associations [J].
van Zitteren, Moniek ;
van der Net, Jeroen B. ;
Kundu, Suman ;
Freedman, Andrew N. ;
van Duijn, Cornelia M. ;
Janssens, A. Cecile J. W. .
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2011, 20 (01) :9-22
[63]   Relative validity and reproducibility of a French dietary history questionnaire [J].
VanLiere, MJ ;
Lucas, F ;
Clavel, F ;
Slimani, N ;
Villeminot, S .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 26 :S128-S136
[64]   Use of Pharmacologic Interventions for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline [J].
Visvanathan, Kala ;
Hurley, Patricia ;
Bantug, Elissa ;
Brown, Powel ;
Col, Nananda F. ;
Cuzick, Jack ;
Davidson, Nancy E. ;
DeCensi, Andrea ;
Fabian, Carol ;
Ford, Leslie ;
Garber, Judy ;
Katapodi, Maria ;
Kramer, Barnett ;
Morrow, Monica ;
Parker, Barbara ;
Runowicz, Carolyn ;
Vogel, Victor G., III ;
Wade, James L. ;
Lippman, Scott M. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 31 (23) :2942-+
[65]   Performance of Common Genetic Variants in Breast-Cancer Risk Models. [J].
Wacholder, Sholom ;
Hartge, Patricia ;
Prentice, Ross ;
Garcia-Closas, Montserrat ;
Feigelson, Heather Spencer ;
Diver, W. Ryan ;
Thun, Michael J. ;
Cox, David G. ;
Hankinson, Susan E. ;
Kraft, Peter ;
Rosner, Bernard ;
Berg, Christine D. ;
Brinton, Louise A. ;
Lissowska, Jolanta ;
Sherman, Mark E. ;
Chlebowski, Rowan ;
Kooperberg, Charles ;
Jackson, Rebecca D. ;
Buckman, Dennis W. ;
Hui, Peter ;
Pfeiffer, Ruth ;
Jacobs, Kevin B. ;
Thomas, Gilles D. ;
Hoover, Robert N. ;
Gail, Mitchell H. ;
Chanock, Stephen J. ;
Hunter, David J. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2010, 362 (11) :986-993