Literature DB >> 16918912

Effect of misreported family history on Mendelian mutation prediction models.

Hormuzd A Katki1.   

Abstract

People with familial history of disease often consult with genetic counselors about their chance of carrying mutations that increase disease risk. To aid them, genetic counselors use Mendelian models that predict whether the person carries deleterious mutations based on their reported family history. Such models rely on accurate reporting of each member's diagnosis and age of diagnosis, but this information may be inaccurate. Commonly encountered errors in family history can significantly distort predictions, and thus can alter the clinical management of people undergoing counseling, screening, or genetic testing. We derive general results about the distortion in the carrier probability estimate caused by misreported diagnoses in relatives. We show that the Bayes factor that channels all family history information has a convenient and intuitive interpretation. We focus on the ratio of the carrier odds given correct diagnosis versus given misreported diagnosis to measure the impact of errors. We derive the general form of this ratio and approximate it in realistic cases. Misreported age of diagnosis usually causes less distortion than misreported diagnosis. This is the first systematic quantitative assessment of the effect of misreported family history on mutation prediction. We apply the results to the BRCAPRO model, which predicts the risk of carrying a mutation in the breast and ovarian cancer genes BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16918912      PMCID: PMC2274043          DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00488.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  8 in total

Review 1.  Risk communication in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.

Authors:  R T Croyle; C Lerman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1999

2.  As genetic tests move into the mainstream, challenges await for doctors and patients.

Authors:  Sarah L Zielinski
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-03-02       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  BayesMendel: an R environment for Mendelian risk prediction.

Authors:  Sining Chen; Wenyi Wang; Karl W Broman; Hormuzd A Katki; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2004-09-17

4.  Probability of carrying a mutation of breast-ovarian cancer gene BRCA1 based on family history.

Authors:  D A Berry; G Parmigiani; J Sanchez; J Schildkraut; E Winer
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1997-02-05       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Authors:  G Parmigiani; D Berry; O Aguilar
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 6.  Application of breast cancer risk prediction models in clinical practice.

Authors:  Susan M Domchek; Andrea Eisen; Kathleen Calzone; Jill Stopfer; Anne Blackwood; Barbara L Weber
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-02-15       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Validation of family history data in cancer family registries.

Authors:  Argyrios Ziogas; Hoda Anton-Culver
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 5.043

8.  The genetic attributable risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  E B Claus; J M Schildkraut; W D Thompson; N J Risch
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1996-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

  8 in total
  9 in total

1.  To test, or not to test: time for a MODY calculator?

Authors:  P R Njølstad; A Molven
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2012-03-02       Impact factor: 10.122

2.  Nonparametric Adjustment for Measurement Error in Time-to-Event Data: Application to Risk Prediction Models.

Authors:  Danielle Braun; Malka Gorfine; Hormuzd A Katki; Argyrios Ziogas; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 5.033

3.  Quantifying risk stratification provided by diagnostic tests and risk predictions: Comparison to AUC and decision curve analysis.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Frailty Models for Familial Risk with Application to Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Malka Gorfine; Li Hsu; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 5.033

5.  Multiple diseases in carrier probability estimation: accounting for surviving all cancers other than breast and ovary in BRCAPRO.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki; Amanda Blackford; Sining Chen; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Performance of BRCA1/2 mutation prediction models in Asian Americans.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Gail D Gong; Nicolette M Chun; Meredith A Mills; Ashley D Staton; Kerry E Kingham; Beth B Crawford; Robin Lee; Salina Chan; Susan S Donlon; Yolanda Ridge; Karen Panabaker; Dee W West; Alice S Whittemore; James M Ford
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-09-08       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Accuracy of BRCA1/2 mutation prediction models for different ethnicities and genders: experience in a southern Chinese cohort.

Authors:  Ava Kwong; Connie H N Wong; Dacita T K Suen; Michael Co; Allison W Kurian; Dee W West; James M Ford
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Incorporating medical interventions into carrier probability estimation for genetic counseling.

Authors:  Hormuzd A Katki
Journal:  BMC Med Genet       Date:  2007-03-22       Impact factor: 2.103

9.  Uncertainty quantification in breast cancer risk prediction models using self-reported family health history.

Authors:  Lance T Pflieger; Clinton C Mason; Julio C Facelli
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2017-01-20
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.