Literature DB >> 17243094

Estimating risk of breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: a meta-analytic approach.

Rongwei Fu1, Emily L Harris, Mark Helfand, Heidi D Nelson.   

Abstract

Estimates of penetrance (or risk) of breast cancer among BRCA mutation carriers in published studies are heterogeneous, prohibiting direct combined estimates. Estimates of prevalence of BRCA mutations are more homogeneous and could allow combined estimates of prevalence. We propose a combined estimator of penetrance from combined estimates of the prevalence of BRCA mutations in women with and without breast cancer and from the probability of breast cancer by using Bayes' Theorem. The relative risk of having breast cancer with positive family history and the prevalence of positive family history contribute to the combined estimate of penetrance if family history is present. The combined estimate incorporates variation in estimates from different resources. The method is illustrated by using data from Ashkenazi Jewish women unselected for family history and for those with family history. Risks of breast cancer conferred by BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations are estimated to be 8.39 per cent (6.56, 10.68 per cent) and 2.66 per cent (1.85, 3.82 per cent) by 40 years old, and 47.45 per cent (37.39, 57.72 per cent) and 31.85 per cent (23.72, 41.26 per cent) by 75 years old, respectively. For those with family history, risks of breast cancer conferred by BRCA mutations appear to be higher. c 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17243094     DOI: 10.1002/sim.2811

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  7 in total

Review 1.  Bias Correction Methods Explain Much of the Variation Seen in Breast Cancer Risks of BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers.

Authors:  Janet R Vos; Li Hsu; Richard M Brohet; Marian J E Mourits; Jakob de Vries; Kathleen E Malone; Jan C Oosterwijk; Geertruida H de Bock
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Age-Dependent Cancer Risk Is Not Different in between MSH2 and MLH1 Mutation Carriers.

Authors:  Sylviane Olschwang; Kai Yu; Christine Lasset; Stéphanie Baert-Desurmont; Marie-Pierre Buisine; Qing Wang; Pierre Hutter; Etienne Rouleau; Olivier Caron; Violaine Bourdon; Gilles Thomas
Journal:  J Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2009-03-08

3.  Using lifetime risk estimates in personal genomic profiles: estimation of uncertainty.

Authors:  Quanhe Yang; W Dana Flanders; Ramal Moonesinghe; John P A Ioannidis; Idris Guessous; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  How accurate can genetic predictions be?

Authors:  Jonathan M Dreyfuss; Daniel Levner; James E Galagan; George M Church; Marco F Ramoni
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 3.969

5.  A screening and prevention programme serving an ethnically diverse population of women at high risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer.

Authors:  J Smith; L Baer; S Blank; A Dilawari; K Carapetyan; M Alvear; M Utate; J Curtin; F Muggia
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2009-03-16

6.  The Changing Face of Mastectomy (from Mutilation to Aid to Breast Reconstruction).

Authors:  Stefano Zurrida; Fabio Bassi; Paolo Arnone; Stefano Martella; Andres Del Castillo; Rafael Ribeiro Martini; M Eugenia Semenkiw; Pietro Caldarella
Journal:  Int J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-06-05

7.  Different Patterns of Risk Reducing Decisions in Affected or Unaffected BRCA Pathogenic Variant Carriers.

Authors:  Eun-Gyeong Lee; Hyok Jo Kang; Myong Cheol Lim; Boyoung Park; Soo Jin Park; So-Youn Jung; Seeyoun Lee; Han-Sung Kang; Sang-Yoon Park; Boram Park; Jungnam Joo; Jai Hong Han; Sun-Young Kong; Eun Sook Lee
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 4.679

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.