Breast cancer risk assessment across the risk continuum: genetic and nongenetic risk factors contributing to differential model performance

IntroductionClinicians use different breast cancer risk models for patients considered at average and above-average risk, based largely on their family histories and genetic factors. We used longitudinal cohort data from women whose breast cancer risks span the full spectrum to determine the genetic and nongenetic covariates that differentiate the performance of two commonly used models that include nongenetic factors - BCRAT, also called Gail model, generally used for patients with average risk and IBIS, also called Tyrer Cuzick model, generally used for patients with above-average risk.MethodsWe evaluated the performance of the BCRAT and IBIS models as currently applied in clinical settings for 10-year absolute risk of breast cancer, using prospective data from 1,857 women over a mean follow-up length of 8.1 years, of whom 83 developed cancer. This cohort spans the continuum of breast cancer risk, with some subjects at lower than average population risk. Therefore, the wide variation in individual risk makes it an interesting population to examine model performance across subgroups of women. For model calibration, we divided the cohort into quartiles of model-assigned risk and compared differences between assigned and observed risks using the Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) chi-squared statistic. For model discrimination, we computed the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) and the case risk percentiles (CRPs).ResultsThe 10-year risks assigned by BCRAT and IBIS differed (range of difference 0.001 to 79.5). The mean BCRAT- and IBIS-assigned risks of 3.18% and 5.49%, respectively, were lower than the cohort's 10-year cumulative probability of developing breast cancer (6.25%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.0 to 7.8%). Agreement between assigned and observed risks was better for IBIS (HL X42 = 7.2, P value 0.13) than BCRAT (HL X42 = 22.0, P value <0.001). The IBIS model also showed better discrimination (AUC = 69.5%, CI = 63.8% to 75.2%) than did the BCRAT model (AUC = 63.2%, CI = 57.6% to 68.9%). In almost all covariate-specific subgroups, BCRAT mean risks were significantly lower than the observed risks, while IBIS risks showed generally good agreement with observed risks, even in the subgroups of women considered at average risk (for example, no family history of breast cancer, BRCA1/2 mutation negative).ConclusionsModels developed using extended family history and genetic data, such as the IBIS model, also perform well in women considered at average risk (for example, no family history of breast cancer, BRCA1/2 mutation negative). Extending such models to include additional nongenetic information may improve performance in women across the breast cancer risk continuum.

[1]  Margaret Sullivan Pepe,et al.  Standardizing Diagnostic Markers to Evaluate and Compare Their Performance , 2005, Epidemiology.

[2]  Laurence L. George,et al.  The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data , 2003, Technometrics.

[3]  J. Kalbfleisch,et al.  The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data: Kalbfleisch/The Statistical , 2002 .

[4]  J. Kalbfleisch,et al.  The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data , 1980 .

[5]  Mitchell H Gail,et al.  Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in Asian and Pacific Islander American women. , 2011, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  M. Pike,et al.  Invasive breast cancer incidence trends by detailed race/ethnicity and age , 2012, International journal of cancer.

[7]  L. Ford,et al.  Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[8]  T. Lumley,et al.  Time‐Dependent ROC Curves for Censored Survival Data and a Diagnostic Marker , 2000, Biometrics.

[9]  N. Risch,et al.  Autosomal dominant inheritance of early‐onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction , 1994 .

[10]  Cecelia Bellcross,et al.  Approaches to applying breast cancer risk prediction models in clinical practice , 2009 .

[11]  J Benichou,et al.  Validation studies for models projecting the risk of invasive and total breast cancer incidence. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[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]  O. Olopade,et al.  Prediction of BRCA Mutations Using the BRCAPRO Model in Clinic-Based African American, Hispanic, and Other Minority Families in the United States. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  D Spiegelman,et al.  Validation of the Gail et al. model for predicting individual breast cancer risk. , 1994, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

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

[16]  D. Kennedy,et al.  DNA repair capacity of lymphoblastoid cell lines from sisters discordant for breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[17]  Norman Boyd,et al.  The Breast Cancer Family Registry: an infrastructure for cooperative multinational, interdisciplinary and translational studies of the genetic epidemiology of breast cancer , 2004, Breast Cancer Research.

[18]  V Shane Pankratz,et al.  Evaluation of the Tyrer-Cuzick (International Breast Cancer Intervention Study) model for breast cancer risk prediction in women with atypical hyperplasia. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  David W. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .

[20]  Mohd Hamid,et al.  Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool , 2014 .

[21]  R. Santella,et al.  Repetitive element DNA methylation levels in white blood cell DNA from sisters discordant for breast cancer from the New York site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry. , 2012, Carcinogenesis.

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

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

[24]  Ammarin Thakkinstian,et al.  Risk prediction models of breast cancer: a systematic review of model performances , 2012, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[25]  A. Whittemore,et al.  BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry: an open resource for collaborative research , 2009, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[26]  R. Santella,et al.  Genomic Methylation Changes Over Time in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell DNA: Differences by Assay Type and Baseline Values , 2012, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[27]  Mitchell H Gail,et al.  On criteria for evaluating models of absolute risk. , 2005, Biostatistics.

[28]  D. Evans,et al.  Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. , 2010, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[29]  N Risch,et al.  Autosomal dominant inheritance of early‐onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction , 1994, Cancer.

[30]  R. Santella,et al.  Plasma protein carbonyls and breast cancer risk in sisters discordant for breast cancer from the New York site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry. , 2009, Cancer research.

[31]  A. Leitch,et al.  Limitations of the Gail Model in the Specialized Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic , 2002, The breast journal.

[32]  Melissa Bondy,et al.  Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women. , 2007, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[33]  R. Santella,et al.  Short telomere length and breast cancer risk: a study in sister sets. , 2007, Cancer research.

[34]  D. Easton,et al.  The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer , 2004, British Journal of Cancer.

[35]  N. Risch,et al.  The calculation of breast cancer risk for women with a first degree family history of ovarian cancer , 1993, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[36]  R. Vierkant,et al.  Assessment of the accuracy of the Gail model in women with atypical hyperplasia. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[37]  E. Lustbader,et al.  Validation of a breast cancer risk assessment model in women with a positive family history. , 1994, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[38]  Christi J. van Asperen,et al.  Differences and similarities in breast cancer risk assessment models in clinical practice: which model to choose? , 2009, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.