Literature DB >> 18042936

Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women.

Mitchell H Gail1, Joseph P Costantino, David Pee, Melissa Bondy, Lisa Newman, Mano Selvan, Garnet L Anderson, Kathleen E Malone, Polly A Marchbanks, Worta McCaskill-Stevens, Sandra A Norman, Michael S Simon, Robert Spirtas, Giske Ursin, Leslie Bernstein.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) is widely used for counseling and determining eligibility for breast cancer prevention trials, although its validity for projecting risk in African American women is uncertain. We developed a model for projecting absolute risk of invasive breast cancer in African American women and compared its projections with those from the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool.
METHODS: Data from 1607 African American women with invasive breast cancer and 1647 African American control subjects in the Women's Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences (CARE) Study were used to compute relative and attributable risks that were based on age at menarche, number of affected mother or sisters, and number of previous benign biopsy examinations. Absolute risks were obtained by combining this information with data on invasive breast cancer incidence in African American women from the NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program and with national mortality data. Eligibility screening data from the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) trial were used to determine how the new model would affect eligibility, and independent data from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) were used to assess how well numbers of invasive breast cancers predicted by the new model agreed with observed cancers.
RESULTS: Tables and graphs for estimating relative risks and projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk with confidence intervals were developed for African American women. Relative risks for family history and number of biopsies and attributable risks estimated from the CARE population were lower than those from the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool, as was the discriminatory accuracy (i.e., concordance). Using eligibility screening data from the STAR trial, we estimated that 30.3% of African American women would have had 5-year invasive breast cancer risks of at least 1.66% by use of the CARE model, compared with only 14.5% by use of the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. The numbers of cancers predicted by the CARE model agreed well with observed numbers of cancers (i.e., it was well calibrated) in data from the WHI, except that it underestimated risk in African American women with breast biopsy examinations.
CONCLUSIONS: The CARE model usually gave higher risk estimates for African American women than the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool and is recommended for counseling African American women regarding their risk of breast cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18042936     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djm223

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  128 in total

1.  Breast Cancer Chemoprevention among High-risk Women and those with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

Authors:  Laura L Reimers; Parijatham S Sivasubramanian; Dawn Hershman; Mary Beth Terry; Heather Greenlee; Julie Campbell; Kevin Kalinsky; Matthew Maurer; Ramona Jayasena; Rossy Sandoval; Maria Alvarez; Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 2.431

2.  Why are Tailored Messages More Effective? A Multiple Mediation Analysis of a Breast Cancer Screening Intervention.

Authors:  Jakob D Jensen; Andy J King; Nicholas Carcioppolo; LaShara Davis
Journal:  J Commun       Date:  2012-10

3.  Traditional dietary pattern of South America is linked to breast cancer: an ongoing case-control study in Argentina.

Authors:  Natalia Tumas; Camila Niclis; Laura R Aballay; Alberto R Osella; María del Pilar Díaz
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 5.614

4.  Chemoprevention Uptake among Women with Atypical Hyperplasia and Lobular and Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

Authors:  Meghna S Trivedi; Austin M Coe; Alejandro Vanegas; Rita Kukafka; Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2017-06-13

5.  Performance of Breast Cancer Risk-Assessment Models in a Large Mammography Cohort.

Authors:  Anne Marie McCarthy; Zoe Guan; Michaela Welch; Molly E Griffin; Dorothy A Sippo; Zhengyi Deng; Suzanne B Coopey; Ahmet Acar; Alan Semine; Giovanni Parmigiani; Danielle Braun; Kevin S Hughes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Views of Low-Income Women of Color at Increased Risk for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Emily E Anderson; Silvia Tejada; Richard B Warnecke; Kent Hoskins
Journal:  Narrat Inq Bioeth       Date:  2018

7.  Breast density influences tumor subtypes and tumor aggressiveness.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Amanda I Phipps
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Assessing the goodness of fit of personal risk models.

Authors:  Gail Gong; Anne S Quante; Mary Beth Terry; Alice S Whittemore
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Breast cancer risk assessments comparing Gail and CARE models in African-American women.

Authors:  Lucile L Adams-Campbell; Kepher H Makambi; Wayne A I Frederick; Melvin Gaskins; Robert L Dewitty; Worta McCaskill-Stevens
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2009 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.431

10.  Baseline mammographic breast density and the risk of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women participating in the NSABP study of tamoxifen and raloxifene (STAR).

Authors:  Reena S Cecchini; Joseph P Costantino; Jane A Cauley; Walter M Cronin; D Lawrence Wickerham; Hanna Bandos; Joel L Weissfeld; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2012-10-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.