Literature DB >> 28263689

Comparison of Breast Cancer Risk Predictive Models and Screening Strategies for Chinese Women.

Ying Zhao1,2, Ping Xiong1, Lauren E McCullough3,4, Erline E Miller3, Hui Li1, Yuan Huang1,5, Min Zhao1, Meng-Jie Wang1, Min Kang6, Qiong Wang1,7, Jia-Yuan Li1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that organized mammographic screening implementation in China may not be cost-effective. Our aim was to develop a valid predictive mathematical model for selecting high-risk groups eligible for mammography examinations (MAMs) and cost-effective strategies for breast cancer screening among Chinese women.
METHODS: Between 2009 and 2012, 13,355 eligible women aged 30-65 years were enrolled from the community in Chengdu City. All subjects were administered a valid questionnaire and given MAMs. Using biopsies and 1-year follow up, we compared the accuracy indexes of three predictive models (back-propagation artificial neural network [BP-ANN], logistic regression [LR], and Gail) and four serial screening strategies (BP-ANN→MAM, LR→MAM, Gail→MAM, and MAM alone). We also evaluated the benefits of the four strategies by comparing their incidence-adjusted positive predictive value (PPV). All analyses were conducted with three age-based subgroups: 30-39, 40-49, and 50-65.
RESULTS: The BP-ANN1, in conjunction with additional continuous risk factor variables, was the best predictive model, with the highest sensitivity (SEN, 76.99%) and specificity (SPE, 54.20%). The BP-ANN1→MAM strategy was best for the 40-49 age group, with the highest adjusted PPV (9.80%) and reasonable SEN (81.82%).
CONCLUSION: We found that the BP-ANN model performed the best and was the most accurate for predicting high risk for breast cancer among Chinese women, and the BP-ANN→MAM screening strategy was most effective among the 40-49 age group. However, mammography alone may be a sufficient screening strategy for women aged 50-65.

Entities:  

Keywords:  artificial neural network; breast cancer; mammography; risk assessment; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28263689     DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2015.5692

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)        ISSN: 1540-9996            Impact factor:   2.681


  1 in total

1.  Downgrade BI-RADS 4A Patients Using Nomogram Based on Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Ultrasound, and Mammography.

Authors:  Yamie Xie; Ying Zhu; Weimin Chai; Shaoyun Zong; Shangyan Xu; Weiwei Zhan; Xiaoxiao Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 6.244

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.