Elke M van Veen1, Adam R Brentnall2, Helen Byers1, Elaine F Harkness3,4,5, Susan M Astley3,4,5,6, Sarah Sampson3, Anthony Howell3,6,7, William G Newman1,6,8, Jack Cuzick2, D Gareth R Evans1,3,6,7,8. 1. Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England. 2. Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Charterhouse Square, Barts and The London, Queen Mary University of London, London, England. 3. Prevention Breast Cancer Centre and Nightingale Breast Screening Centre, Manchester University Hospital Foundation Trust, Manchester, England. 4. Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. 5. Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. 6. Manchester Breast Centre, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. 7. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom. 8. Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have demonstrated an association with breast cancer susceptibility, but there is limited evidence on how to incorporate them into current breast cancer risk prediction models. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a panel of 18 SNPs (SNP18) may be used to predict breast cancer in combination with classic risk factors and mammographic density. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study enrolled a subcohort of 9363 women, aged 46 to 73 years, without a previous breast cancer diagnosis from the larger prospective cohort of the PROCAS study (Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening) specifically to evaluate breast cancer risk-assessment methods. Enrollment took place from October 2009 through June 2015 from multiple population-based screening centers in Greater Manchester, England. Follow-up continued through January 5, 2017. EXPOSURES: Genotyping of 18 SNPs, visual-assessment percentage mammographic density, and classic risk assessed by the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model from a self-completed questionnaire at cohort entry. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The predictive ability of SNP18 for breast cancer diagnosis (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ) was assessed using logistic regression odds ratios per interquartile range of the predicted risk. RESULTS: A total of 9363 women were enrolled in this study (mean [range] age, 59 [46-73] years). Of these, 466 were found to have breast cancer (271 prevalent; 195 incident). SNP18 was similarly predictive when unadjusted or adjusted for mammographic density and classic factors (odds ratios per interquartile range, respectively, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.38-1.77 and 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74), with observed risks being very close to expected (adjusted observed-to-expected odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.69-1.28). A combined risk assessment indicated 18% of the subcohort to be at 5% or greater 10-year risk, compared with 30% of all cancers, 35% of interval-detected cancers, and 42% of stage 2+ cancers. In contrast, 33% of the subcohort were at less than 2% risk but accounted for only 18%, 17%, and 15% of the total, interval, and stage 2+ breast cancers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: SNP18 added substantial information to risk assessment based on the Tyrer-Cuzick model and mammographic density. A combined risk is likely to aid risk-stratified screening and prevention strategies.
IMPORTANCE: Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have demonstrated an association with breast cancer susceptibility, but there is limited evidence on how to incorporate them into current breast cancer risk prediction models. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a panel of 18 SNPs (SNP18) may be used to predict breast cancer in combination with classic risk factors and mammographic density. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study enrolled a subcohort of 9363 women, aged 46 to 73 years, without a previous breast cancer diagnosis from the larger prospective cohort of the PROCAS study (Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening) specifically to evaluate breast cancer risk-assessment methods. Enrollment took place from October 2009 through June 2015 from multiple population-based screening centers in Greater Manchester, England. Follow-up continued through January 5, 2017. EXPOSURES: Genotyping of 18 SNPs, visual-assessment percentage mammographic density, and classic risk assessed by the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model from a self-completed questionnaire at cohort entry. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The predictive ability of SNP18 for breast cancer diagnosis (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ) was assessed using logistic regression odds ratios per interquartile range of the predicted risk. RESULTS: A total of 9363 women were enrolled in this study (mean [range] age, 59 [46-73] years). Of these, 466 were found to have breast cancer (271 prevalent; 195 incident). SNP18 was similarly predictive when unadjusted or adjusted for mammographic density and classic factors (odds ratios per interquartile range, respectively, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.38-1.77 and 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74), with observed risks being very close to expected (adjusted observed-to-expected odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.69-1.28). A combined risk assessment indicated 18% of the subcohort to be at 5% or greater 10-year risk, compared with 30% of all cancers, 35% of interval-detected cancers, and 42% of stage 2+ cancers. In contrast, 33% of the subcohort were at less than 2% risk but accounted for only 18%, 17%, and 15% of the total, interval, and stage 2+ breast cancers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: SNP18 added substantial information to risk assessment based on the Tyrer-Cuzick model and mammographic density. A combined risk is likely to aid risk-stratified screening and prevention strategies.
Authors: Celine M Vachon; V Shane Pankratz; Christopher G Scott; Lothar Haeberle; Elad Ziv; Matthew R Jensen; Kathleen R Brandt; Dana H Whaley; Janet E Olson; Katharina Heusinger; Carolin C Hack; Sebastian M Jud; Matthias W Beckmann; Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland; Jeffrey A Tice; Aaron D Norman; Julie M Cunningham; Kristen S Purrington; Douglas F Easton; Thomas A Sellers; Karla Kerlikowske; Peter A Fasching; Fergus J Couch Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Ella R Thompson; Simone M Rowley; Na Li; Simone McInerny; Lisa Devereux; Michelle W Wong-Brown; Alison H Trainer; Gillian Mitchell; Rodney J Scott; Paul A James; Ian G Campbell Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M H Gail; L A Brinton; D P Byar; D K Corle; S B Green; C Schairer; J J Mulvihill Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1989-12-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Nimmi S Kapoor; Lisa D Curcio; Carlee A Blakemore; Amy K Bremner; Rachel E McFarland; John G West; Kimberly C Banks Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Gillian S Dite; Robert J MacInnis; Adrian Bickerstaffe; James G Dowty; Richard Allman; Carmel Apicella; Roger L Milne; Helen Tsimiklis; Kelly-Anne Phillips; Graham G Giles; Mary Beth Terry; Melissa C Southey; John L Hopper Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Jane Warwick; Hanna Birke; Jennifer Stone; Ruth M L Warren; Elizabeth Pinney; Adam R Brentnall; Stephen W Duffy; Anthony Howell; Jack Cuzick Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: D Gareth R Evans; Jane Warwick; Susan M Astley; Paula Stavrinos; Sarah Sahin; Sarah Ingham; Helen McBurney; Barbara Eckersley; Michelle Harvie; Mary Wilson; Ursula Beetles; Ruth Warren; Alan Hufton; Jamie C Sergeant; William G Newman; Iain Buchan; Jack Cuzick; Anthony Howell Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2012-05-11
Authors: Hisani N Horne; Charles C Chung; Han Zhang; Kai Yu; Ludmila Prokunina-Olsson; Kyriaki Michailidou; Manjeet K Bolla; Qin Wang; Joe Dennis; John L Hopper; Melissa C Southey; Marjanka K Schmidt; Annegien Broeks; Kenneth Muir; Artitaya Lophatananon; Peter A Fasching; Matthias W Beckmann; Olivia Fletcher; Nichola Johnson; Elinor J Sawyer; Ian Tomlinson; Barbara Burwinkel; Frederik Marme; Pascal Guénel; Thérèse Truong; Stig E Bojesen; Henrik Flyger; Javier Benitez; Anna González-Neira; Hoda Anton-Culver; Susan L Neuhausen; Hermann Brenner; Volker Arndt; Alfons Meindl; Rita K Schmutzler; Hiltrud Brauch; Ute Hamann; Heli Nevanlinna; Sofia Khan; Keitaro Matsuo; Hiroji Iwata; Thilo Dörk; Natalia V Bogdanova; Annika Lindblom; Sara Margolin; Arto Mannermaa; Veli-Matti Kosma; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Anna H Wu; David Ven den Berg; Ann Smeets; Hui Zhao; Jenny Chang-Claude; Anja Rudolph; Paolo Radice; Monica Barile; Fergus J Couch; Celine Vachon; Graham G Giles; Roger L Milne; Christopher A Haiman; Loic Le Marchand; Mark S Goldberg; Soo H Teo; Nur A M Taib; Vessela Kristensen; Anne-Lise Borresen-Dale; Wei Zheng; Martha Shrubsole; Robert Winqvist; Arja Jukkola-Vuorinen; Irene L Andrulis; Julia A Knight; Peter Devilee; Caroline Seynaeve; Montserrat García-Closas; Kamila Czene; Hatef Darabi; Antoinette Hollestelle; John W M Martens; Jingmei Li; Wei Lu; Xiao-Ou Shu; Angela Cox; Simon S Cross; William Blot; Qiuyin Cai; Mitul Shah; Craig Luccarini; Caroline Baynes; Patricia Harrington; Daehee Kang; Ji-Yeob Choi; Mikael Hartman; Kee Seng Chia; Maria Kabisch; Diana Torres; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubinski; Suleeporn Sangrajrang; Paul Brennan; Susan Slager; Drakoulis Yannoukakos; Chen-Yang Shen; Ming-Feng Hou; Anthony Swerdlow; Nick Orr; Jacques Simard; Per Hall; Paul D P Pharoah; Douglas F Easton; Stephen J Chanock; Alison M Dunning; Jonine D Figueroa Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: D Gareth Evans; Elke M van Veen; Helen Byers; Eleanor Roberts; Anthony Howell; Sacha J Howell; Elaine F Harkness; Adam Brentnall; Jack Cuzick; William G Newman Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 7.316
Authors: Amber N Hurson; Parichoy Pal Choudhury; Chi Gao; Anika Hüsing; Mikael Eriksson; Min Shi; Michael E Jones; D Gareth R Evans; Roger L Milne; Mia M Gaudet; Celine M Vachon; Daniel I Chasman; Douglas F Easton; Marjanka K Schmidt; Peter Kraft; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Nilanjan Chatterjee Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2021-03-23 Impact factor: 9.685
Authors: Bernard Rosner; Rulla M Tamimi; Peter Kraft; Chi Gao; Yi Mu; Christopher Scott; Stacey J Winham; Celine M Vachon; Graham A Colditz Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-12-04 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Chao Wang; Adam R Brentnall; Jack Cuzick; Elaine F Harkness; D Gareth Evans; Susan Astley Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Weang-Kee Ho; Min-Min Tan; Nasim Mavaddat; Mei-Chee Tai; Shivaani Mariapun; Jingmei Li; Peh-Joo Ho; Joe Dennis; Jonathan P Tyrer; Manjeet K Bolla; Kyriaki Michailidou; Qin Wang; Daehee Kang; Ji-Yeob Choi; Suniza Jamaris; Xiao-Ou Shu; Sook-Yee Yoon; Sue K Park; Sung-Won Kim; Chen-Yang Shen; Jyh-Cherng Yu; Ern Yu Tan; Patrick Mun Yew Chan; Kenneth Muir; Artitaya Lophatananon; Anna H Wu; Daniel O Stram; Keitaro Matsuo; Hidemi Ito; Ching Wan Chan; Joanne Ngeow; Wei Sean Yong; Swee Ho Lim; Geok Hoon Lim; Ava Kwong; Tsun L Chan; Su Ming Tan; Jaime Seah; Esther M John; Allison W Kurian; Woon-Puay Koh; Chiea Chuen Khor; Motoki Iwasaki; Taiki Yamaji; Kiak Mien Veronique Tan; Kiat Tee Benita Tan; John J Spinelli; Kristan J Aronson; Siti Norhidayu Hasan; Kartini Rahmat; Anushya Vijayananthan; Xueling Sim; Paul D P Pharoah; Wei Zheng; Alison M Dunning; Jacques Simard; Rob Martinus van Dam; Cheng-Har Yip; Nur Aishah Mohd Taib; Mikael Hartman; Douglas F Easton; Soo-Hwang Teo; Antonis C Antoniou Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-07-31 Impact factor: 14.919