BACKGROUND: Gail et al. developed a statistical model for estimating the risk of developing breast cancer in white women screened annually with mammography. This model is used for counseling and for admission to clinical trials. PURPOSE: We evaluated the model prospectively in a cohort of women with a family history of breast cancer. METHODS: We followed women who participated in the American Cancer Society 1987 Texas Breast Screening Project. The model was evaluated by comparing the observed (O) and expected (E) numbers of breast cancers using composite background rates from both the Breast Cancer Detection and Demonstration Project and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program of the National Cancer Institute. Data were partitioned by adherence to American Cancer Society screening guidelines. RESULTS: The Gail et al. model predicted the risk well among women who adhered to the American Cancer Society guidelines (O/E = 1.12; 95% confidence interval = 0.75-1.61) but overpredicted risk for women who did not adhere to the guidelines. There was an indication that the model overpredicted risk for women younger than 60 years old and underpredicted risk in women aged 60 years and older. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the Gail et al. model accurately predicts risk in women with a family history of breast cancer and who adhere to American Cancer Society screening guidelines. Thus, the model should be used as it was intended, for women who receive annual mammograms.
BACKGROUND: Gail et al. developed a statistical model for estimating the risk of developing breast cancer in white women screened annually with mammography. This model is used for counseling and for admission to clinical trials. PURPOSE: We evaluated the model prospectively in a cohort of women with a family history of breast cancer. METHODS: We followed women who participated in the American Cancer Society 1987 Texas Breast Screening Project. The model was evaluated by comparing the observed (O) and expected (E) numbers of breast cancers using composite background rates from both the Breast Cancer Detection and Demonstration Project and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program of the National Cancer Institute. Data were partitioned by adherence to American Cancer Society screening guidelines. RESULTS: The Gail et al. model predicted the risk well among women who adhered to the American Cancer Society guidelines (O/E = 1.12; 95% confidence interval = 0.75-1.61) but overpredicted risk for women who did not adhere to the guidelines. There was an indication that the model overpredicted risk for women younger than 60 years old and underpredicted risk in women aged 60 years and older. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the Gail et al. model accurately predicts risk in women with a family history of breast cancer and who adhere to American Cancer Society screening guidelines. Thus, the model should be used as it was intended, for women who receive annual mammograms.
Authors: Matthew P Banegas; Mitchell H Gail; Andrea LaCroix; Beti Thompson; Maria Elena Martinez; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Esther M John; F Allan Hubbell; Shagufta Yasmeen; Hormuzd A Katki Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Sara J Schonfeld; David Pee; Robert T Greenlee; Patricia Hartge; James V Lacey; Yikyung Park; Arthur Schatzkin; Kala Visvanathan; Ruth M Pfeiffer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Min Yi; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Lavinia P Middleton; Banu K Arun; Isabelle Bedrosian; Gildy V Babiera; Rosa F Hwang; Henry M Kuerer; Wei Yang; Kelly K Hunt Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-03-01 Impact factor: 6.860
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
Authors: V Shane Pankratz; Lynn C Hartmann; Amy C Degnim; Robert A Vierkant; Karthik Ghosh; Celine M Vachon; Marlene H Frost; Shaun D Maloney; Carol Reynolds; Judy C Boughey Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-10-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mark Powell; Farid Jamshidian; Kate Cheyne; Joanne Nititham; Lee Ann Prebil; Rochelle Ereman Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2013-11-22 Impact factor: 3.225