Literature DB >> 33588869

Comparative validation of the BOADICEA and Tyrer-Cuzick breast cancer risk models incorporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk in a population-based prospective cohort of women of European ancestry.

Parichoy Pal Choudhury1, Mark N Brook2, Amber N Hurson1,3, Andrew Lee4, Charlotta V Mulder1, Penny Coulson2, Minouk J Schoemaker2, Michael E Jones2, Anthony J Swerdlow2,5, Nilanjan Chatterjee6, Antonis C Antoniou4, Montserrat Garcia-Closas7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) and the Tyrer-Cuzick breast cancer risk prediction models are commonly used in clinical practice and have recently been extended to include polygenic risk scores (PRS). In addition, BOADICEA has also been extended to include reproductive and lifestyle factors, which were already part of Tyrer-Cuzick model. We conducted a comparative prospective validation of these models after incorporating the recently developed 313-variant PRS.
METHODS: Calibration and discrimination of 5-year absolute risk was assessed in a nested case-control sample of 1337 women of European ancestry (619 incident breast cancer cases) aged 23-75 years from the Generations Study.
RESULTS: The extended BOADICEA model with reproductive/lifestyle factors and PRS was well calibrated across risk deciles; expected-to-observed ratio (E/O) at the highest risk decile :0.97 (95 % CI 0.51 - 1.86) for women younger than 50 years and 1.09 (0.66 - 1.80) for women 50 years or older. Adding reproductive/lifestyle factors and PRS to the BOADICEA model improved discrimination modestly in younger women (area under the curve (AUC) 69.7 % vs. 69.1%) and substantially in older women (AUC 64.6 % vs. 56.8%). The Tyrer-Cuzick model with PRS showed evidence of overestimation at the highest risk decile: E/O = 1.54(0.81 - 2.92) for younger and 1.73 (1.03 - 2.90) for older women.
CONCLUSION: The extended BOADICEA model identified women in a European-ancestry population at elevated breast cancer risk more accurately than the Tyrer-Cuzick model with PRS. With the increasing availability of PRS, these analyses can inform choice of risk models incorporating PRS for risk stratified breast cancer prevention among women of European ancestry.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Absolute risk; BOADICEA; Breast cancer; IBIS; Model validation; Prospective cohort; Risk prediction; Tyrer-Cuzick

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33588869      PMCID: PMC7885342          DOI: 10.1186/s13058-021-01399-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res        ISSN: 1465-5411            Impact factor:   6.466


  3 in total

Review 1.  The personal and clinical utility of polygenic risk scores.

Authors:  Ali Torkamani; Nathan E Wineinger; Eric J Topol
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 53.242

2.  iCARE: An R package to build, validate and apply absolute risk models.

Authors:  Parichoy Pal Choudhury; Paige Maas; Amber Wilcox; William Wheeler; Mark Brook; David Check; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Nilanjan Chatterjee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Incorporating truncating variants in PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM into the BOADICEA breast cancer risk model.

Authors:  Andrew J Lee; Alex P Cunningham; Marc Tischkowitz; Jacques Simard; Paul D Pharoah; Douglas F Easton; Antonis C Antoniou
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 8.822

  3 in total
  8 in total

1.  Considerations of biomarker application for cancer continuum in the era of precision medicine.

Authors:  Rayjean J Hung; Elham Khodayari Moez; Shana J Kim; Sanjeev Budhathoki; Jennifer D Brooks
Journal:  Curr Epidemiol Rep       Date:  2022-07-09

2.  Personalised Risk Prediction in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Protocol for a Multi-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Stephanie Archer; Nichola Fennell; Ellen Colvin; Rozelle Laquindanum; Meredith Mills; Romy Dennis; Francisca Stutzin Donoso; Rochelle Gold; Alice Fan; Kate Downes; James Ford; Antonis C Antoniou; Allison W Kurian; D Gareth Evans; Marc Tischkowitz
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 6.575

3.  Prospective evaluation of a breast-cancer risk model integrating classical risk factors and polygenic risk in 15 cohorts from six countries.

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

4.  Comprehensive epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and epidemiological risk factors.

Authors:  Andrew Lee; Xin Yang; Jonathan Tyrer; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Andy Ryan; Nasim Mavaddat; Alex P Cunningham; Tim Carver; Stephanie Archer; Goska Leslie; Jatinder Kalsi; Faiza Gaba; Ranjit Manchanda; Simon Gayther; Susan J Ramus; Fiona M Walter; Marc Tischkowitz; Ian Jacobs; Usha Menon; Douglas F Easton; Paul Pharoah; Antonis C Antoniou
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 5.941

5.  Prospective Evaluation over 15 Years of Six Breast Cancer Risk Models.

Authors:  Sherly X Li; Roger L Milne; Tú Nguyen-Dumont; Dallas R English; Graham G Giles; Melissa C Southey; Antonis C Antoniou; Andrew Lee; Ingrid Winship; John L Hopper; Mary Beth Terry; Robert J MacInnis
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-10-16       Impact factor: 6.575

Review 6.  Improving reporting standards for polygenic scores in risk prediction studies.

Authors:  Hannah Wand; Samuel A Lambert; Cecelia Tamburro; Michael A Iacocca; Jack W O'Sullivan; Catherine Sillari; Iftikhar J Kullo; Robb Rowley; Jacqueline S Dron; Deanna Brockman; Eric Venner; Mark I McCarthy; Antonis C Antoniou; Douglas F Easton; Robert A Hegele; Amit V Khera; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Charles Kooperberg; Karen Edwards; Katherine Vlessis; Kim Kinnear; John N Danesh; Helen Parkinson; Erin M Ramos; Megan C Roberts; Kelly E Ormond; Muin J Khoury; A Cecile J W Janssens; Katrina A B Goddard; Peter Kraft; Jaqueline A L MacArthur; Michael Inouye; Genevieve L Wojcik
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 69.504

7.  CanRisk Tool-A Web Interface for the Prediction of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk and the Likelihood of Carrying Genetic Pathogenic Variants.

Authors:  Tim Carver; Simon Hartley; Andrew Lee; Alex P Cunningham; Stephanie Archer; Chantal Babb de Villiers; Jonathan Roberts; Rod Ruston; Fiona M Walter; Marc Tischkowitz; Douglas F Easton; Antonis C Antoniou
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-12-17       Impact factor: 4.090

8.  Novel Interactive Tool for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Assessment (Bright Pink Assess Your Risk): Development and Usability Study.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Hibler; Angela J Fought; Kiarri N Kershaw; Rebecca Molsberry; Virginia Nowakowski; Deborah Lindner
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 7.076

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.