Long-term Accuracy of Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Combining Classic Risk Factors and Breast Density

Importance Accurate long-term breast cancer risk assessment for women attending routine screening could help reduce the disease burden and intervention-associated harms by personalizing screening recommendations and preventive interventions. Objective To report the accuracy of risk assessment for breast cancer during a period of 19 years. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study of the Kaiser Permanente Washington breast imaging registry included women without previous breast cancer, aged 40 to 73 years, who attended screening from January 1, 1996, through December 31, 2013. Follow-up was completed on December 31, 2014, and data were analyzed from March 2, 2016, through November 13, 2017. Exposures Risk factors from a questionnaire and breast density from the Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System at entry; primary risk was assessed using the Tyrer-Cuzick model. Main Outcomes and Measures Incidence of invasive breast cancer was estimated with and without breast density. Follow-up began 6 months after the entry mammogram and extended to the earliest diagnosis of invasive breast cancer, censoring at 75 years of age, 2014, diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ, death, or health plan disenrollment. Observed divided by expected (O/E) numbers of cancer cases were compared using exact Poisson 95% CIs. Hazard ratios for the top decile of 10-year risk relative to the middle 80% of the study population were estimated. Constancy of relative risk calibration during follow-up was tested using a time-dependent proportional hazards effect. Results In this cohort study of 132 139 women (median age at entry, 50 years; interquartile range, 44-58 years), 2699 invasive breast cancers were subsequently diagnosed after a median 5.2 years of follow-up (interquartile range, 2.4-11.1 years; maximum follow-up, 19 years; annual incidence rate [IR] per 1000 women, 2.9). Observed number of cancer diagnoses was close to the expected number (O/E for the Tyrer-Cuzick model, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.98-1.06]; O/E for the Tyrer-Cuzick model with density, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.94-1.02]). The Tyrer-Cuzick model estimated 2554 women (1.9%) to be at high risk (10-year risk of ≥8%), of whom 147 subsequently developed invasive breast cancer (O/E, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.93; IR per 1000 women, 8.7). The Tyrer-Cuzick model with density estimated more women to be at high risk (4645 [3.5%]; 273 cancers [10.1%]; O/E, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69-0.88; IR per 1000 women, 9.2). The hazard ratio for the highest risk decile compared with the middle 80% was 2.22 (95% CI, 2.02-2.45) for the Tyrer-Cuzick model and 2.55 (95% CI, 2.33-2.80) for the Tyrer-Cuzick model with density. Little evidence was found for a decrease in relative risk calibration throughout follow-up for the Tyrer-Cuzick model (age-adjusted slope, −0.003; 95% CI, −0.018 to 0.012) or the Tyrer-Cuzick model with density (age-adjusted slope, −0.008; 95% CI, −0.020 to 0.004). Conclusions and Relevance Breast cancer risk assessment combining classic risk factors with mammographic density may provide useful data for 10 years or more and could be used to guide long-term, systematic, risk-adapted screening and prevention strategies.

[1]  S. Duffy,et al.  Impact of Screening on Breast Cancer Mortality: The UK Program 20 Years On , 2015, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[2]  Karla Kerlikowske,et al.  Using Clinical Factors and Mammographic Breast Density to Estimate Breast Cancer Risk: Development and Validation of a New Predictive Model , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[3]  Karla Kerlikowske,et al.  One versus Two Breast Density Measures to Predict 5- and 10-Year Breast Cancer Risk , 2015, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[4]  Emily White,et al.  Evaluating Organized Breast Cancer Screening Implementation , 2004, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[5]  P. Grambsch,et al.  Proportional hazards tests and diagnostics based on weighted residuals , 1994 .

[6]  Arika E. Wieneke,et al.  Validation of natural language processing to extract breast cancer pathology procedures and results , 2015, Journal of pathology informatics.

[7]  D G Altman,et al.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review , 2013, British Journal of Cancer.

[8]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  M. Yaffe,et al.  American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Screening with MRI as an Adjunct to Mammography , 2007, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[10]  S. Fedewa,et al.  Cancer screening in the United States, 2015: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening , 2015, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[11]  L. Liberman,et al.  Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). , 2002, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[12]  M. Gail,et al.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. , 1989, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[13]  C. Vachon,et al.  Breast Density and Benign Breast Disease: Risk Assessment to Identify Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer. , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  Stephen W Duffy,et al.  A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors , 2004, Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice.

[15]  Konstantin Strauch,et al.  Breast cancer risk assessment across the risk continuum: genetic and nongenetic risk factors contributing to differential model performance , 2012, Breast Cancer Research.

[16]  M. Yaffe,et al.  American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Screening with MRI as an Adjunct to Mammography , 2007 .

[17]  C. Lehman,et al.  Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. , 2015, Annals of internal medicine.

[18]  S. Cummings,et al.  Risk Factors That Increase Risk of Estrogen Receptor–Positive and –Negative Breast Cancer , 2017, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[19]  Karla Kerlikowske,et al.  Screening Mammography Use among Current, Former, and Never Hormone Therapy Users May Not Explain Recent Declines in Breast Cancer Incidence , 2012, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[20]  Karla Kerlikowske,et al.  The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk. , 2015, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[21]  D. Saslow,et al.  Cancer screening in the United States, 2011 , 2011, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[22]  Susan M. Astley,et al.  Mammographic density adds accuracy to both the Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail breast cancer risk models in a prospective UK screening cohort , 2015, Breast Cancer Research.

[23]  S. Wood Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models , 2011 .

[24]  Mitchell H Gail,et al.  Comparing breast cancer risk assessment models. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[25]  J. Cuzick,et al.  Use of pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. , 2013, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[26]  A Howell,et al.  Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme , 2003, Journal of medical genetics.

[27]  Identifying Women With Dense Breasts at High Risk for Interval Cancer , 2015, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[28]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[29]  Stephen W Duffy,et al.  Risk determination and prevention of breast cancer , 2014, Breast Cancer Research.

[30]  A. LaCroix,et al.  Selective oestrogen receptor modulators in prevention of breast cancer: an updated meta-analysis of individual participant data , 2013, The Lancet.

[31]  Stephen W Duffy,et al.  Mammographic breast density refines Tyrer-Cuzick estimates of breast cancer risk in high-risk women: findings from the placebo arm of the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study I , 2014, Breast Cancer Research.

[32]  P. Grambsch,et al.  A Package for Survival Analysis in S , 1994 .