Breast cancer risk assessment evaluation of screening tools for genetics referral for women in Taiwan

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Suying Fang, Yaolung Kuo, Pengchan Lin
{"title":"Breast cancer risk assessment evaluation of screening tools for genetics referral for women in Taiwan","authors":"Suying Fang,&nbsp;Yaolung Kuo,&nbsp;Pengchan Lin","doi":"10.1002/jgc4.70010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Risk screening tools recommended by the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) are used to screen potential BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers. The purpose of this study was to identify an appropriate breast cancer risk-screening tool for genetic referral among women with a family history of breast cancer in Taiwan.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A cross-sectional design with convenience sampling was used in this study. Women with a family history of breast cancer but not diagnosed with breast cancer were recruited from surgical outpatient clinics. Sociodemographic and family cancer history were collected based on the screening tools. Both the Tyrer-Cuzick (IBIS) and BRCAPRO were used as a Gold standard to evaluate the accuracy of five screening tools. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and the areas under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) were compared to identify the most accurate one to determine women with elevated risk as defined by IBIS and BRCAPRO calculations with lifetime risk over 15%.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>One hundred twenty-four women with a family history of breast cancer but not yet diagnosed as breast cancer were recruited in this study. When the Tyrer-Cuzick (IBIS) was used as the standard, the AUC for the tools ranged from 0.490 to 0.562. When the BRCAPRO was used as the standard, the <i>p</i> values of the Ontario Family History Assessment Tool (Ontario-FHAT) (<i>p</i> = 0.003) and Pedigree Assessment Tool (PAT) (<i>p</i> = 0.016) were significant, and the AUCs were 0.938 and 0.854 for Ontario-FHAT and PAT, respectively. Since the sensitivity of Ontario-FHAT was 100, which is higher than PAT, we considered that using Ontario-FHAT in Taiwanese women would be better than using PAT.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Ontario-FHAT would be an appropriate screening tool for identifying individuals in Taiwan who may need a genetic referral for further BRCA1/2 risk evaluation.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","volume":"34 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jgc4.70010","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgc4.70010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Risk screening tools recommended by the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) are used to screen potential BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers. The purpose of this study was to identify an appropriate breast cancer risk-screening tool for genetic referral among women with a family history of breast cancer in Taiwan.

Methods

A cross-sectional design with convenience sampling was used in this study. Women with a family history of breast cancer but not diagnosed with breast cancer were recruited from surgical outpatient clinics. Sociodemographic and family cancer history were collected based on the screening tools. Both the Tyrer-Cuzick (IBIS) and BRCAPRO were used as a Gold standard to evaluate the accuracy of five screening tools. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and the areas under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) were compared to identify the most accurate one to determine women with elevated risk as defined by IBIS and BRCAPRO calculations with lifetime risk over 15%.

Results

One hundred twenty-four women with a family history of breast cancer but not yet diagnosed as breast cancer were recruited in this study. When the Tyrer-Cuzick (IBIS) was used as the standard, the AUC for the tools ranged from 0.490 to 0.562. When the BRCAPRO was used as the standard, the p values of the Ontario Family History Assessment Tool (Ontario-FHAT) (p = 0.003) and Pedigree Assessment Tool (PAT) (p = 0.016) were significant, and the AUCs were 0.938 and 0.854 for Ontario-FHAT and PAT, respectively. Since the sensitivity of Ontario-FHAT was 100, which is higher than PAT, we considered that using Ontario-FHAT in Taiwanese women would be better than using PAT.

Conclusions

Ontario-FHAT would be an appropriate screening tool for identifying individuals in Taiwan who may need a genetic referral for further BRCA1/2 risk evaluation.

Abstract Image

台湾女性遗传转诊筛检工具之乳癌风险评估
美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)推荐的风险筛查工具用于筛查潜在的BRCA1/2致病变异携带者。本研究的目的是为台湾有乳癌家族史的女性寻找适合乳癌风险筛检的遗传转诊工具。方法采用方便抽样的横断面设计。有乳腺癌家族史但未被诊断为乳腺癌的妇女从外科门诊诊所招募。根据筛查工具收集社会人口学和家族癌症病史。采用Tyrer-Cuzick (IBIS)和BRCAPRO作为金标准来评估五种筛选工具的准确性。比较敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和受者操作曲线下面积(AUC),以确定最准确的方法来确定IBIS和BRCAPRO计算定义的终身风险超过15%的高风险妇女。结果124名有乳腺癌家族史但尚未被诊断为乳腺癌的女性参与了这项研究。以Tyrer-Cuzick (IBIS)为标准时,工具的AUC范围为0.490 ~ 0.562。以BRCAPRO作为标准时,安大略省家族史评估工具(Ontario Family History Assessment Tool, Ontario- fhat) (p = 0.003)和家谱评估工具(Pedigree Assessment Tool, PAT) (p = 0.016)的p值均具有统计学意义,安大略- fhat和PAT的auc分别为0.938和0.854。由于安大略fhat的敏感性为100,高于PAT,我们认为在台湾女性中使用安大略fhat优于PAT。结论安大略- fhat将是识别台湾可能需要遗传转诊进行进一步BRCA1/2风险评估的个体的合适筛查工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Journal of Genetic Counseling GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
26.30%
发文量
113
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Genetic Counseling (JOGC), published for the National Society of Genetic Counselors, is a timely, international forum addressing all aspects of the discipline and practice of genetic counseling. The journal focuses on the critical questions and problems that arise at the interface between rapidly advancing technological developments and the concerns of individuals and communities at genetic risk. The publication provides genetic counselors, other clinicians and health educators, laboratory geneticists, bioethicists, legal scholars, social scientists, and other researchers with a premier resource on genetic counseling topics in national, international, and cross-national contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信