Anne Marie McCarthy, Sarah Ehsan, Kevin S Hughes, Constance D Lehman, Emily F Conant, Despina Kontos, Katrina Armstrong, Jinbo Chen
{"title":"乳腺癌分子亚型风险评估的可行性。","authors":"Anne Marie McCarthy, Sarah Ehsan, Kevin S Hughes, Constance D Lehman, Emily F Conant, Despina Kontos, Katrina Armstrong, Jinbo Chen","doi":"10.1007/s10549-024-07404-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Few breast cancer risk assessment models account for the risk profiles of different tumor subtypes. This study evaluated whether a subtype-specific approach improves discrimination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Among 3389 women who had a screening mammogram and were later diagnosed with invasive breast cancer we performed multinomial logistic regression with tumor subtype as the outcome and known breast cancer risk factors as predictors. Tumor subtypes were defined by expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) based on immunohistochemistry. Discrimination was assessed with the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Absolute risk of each subtype was estimated by proportioning Gail absolute risk estimates by the predicted probabilities for each subtype. We then compared risk factor distributions for women in the highest deciles of risk for each subtype.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 3,073 ER/PR+ HER2 - , 340 ER/PR +HER2 + , 126 ER/PR-ER2+, and 300 triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC). Discrimination differed by subtype; ER/PR-HER2+ (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.59, 0.69) and TNBC (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.61, 0.68) had better discrimination than ER/PR+HER2+ (AUC: 0.61, 95% CI 0.58, 0.64). Compared to other subtypes, patients at high absolute risk of TNBC were younger, mostly Black, had no family history of breast cancer, and higher BMI. Those at high absolute risk of HER2+ cancers were younger and had lower BMI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study provides proof of concept that stratifying risk prediction for breast cancer subtypes may enable identification of patients with unique profiles conferring increased risk for tumor subtypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11452472/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility of risk assessment for breast cancer molecular subtypes.\",\"authors\":\"Anne Marie McCarthy, Sarah Ehsan, Kevin S Hughes, Constance D Lehman, Emily F Conant, Despina Kontos, Katrina Armstrong, Jinbo Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10549-024-07404-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Few breast cancer risk assessment models account for the risk profiles of different tumor subtypes. This study evaluated whether a subtype-specific approach improves discrimination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Among 3389 women who had a screening mammogram and were later diagnosed with invasive breast cancer we performed multinomial logistic regression with tumor subtype as the outcome and known breast cancer risk factors as predictors. Tumor subtypes were defined by expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) based on immunohistochemistry. Discrimination was assessed with the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Absolute risk of each subtype was estimated by proportioning Gail absolute risk estimates by the predicted probabilities for each subtype. We then compared risk factor distributions for women in the highest deciles of risk for each subtype.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 3,073 ER/PR+ HER2 - , 340 ER/PR +HER2 + , 126 ER/PR-ER2+, and 300 triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC). Discrimination differed by subtype; ER/PR-HER2+ (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.59, 0.69) and TNBC (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.61, 0.68) had better discrimination than ER/PR+HER2+ (AUC: 0.61, 95% CI 0.58, 0.64). Compared to other subtypes, patients at high absolute risk of TNBC were younger, mostly Black, had no family history of breast cancer, and higher BMI. Those at high absolute risk of HER2+ cancers were younger and had lower BMI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study provides proof of concept that stratifying risk prediction for breast cancer subtypes may enable identification of patients with unique profiles conferring increased risk for tumor subtypes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11452472/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07404-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07404-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:很少有乳腺癌风险评估模型考虑到不同肿瘤亚型的风险特征。本研究评估了亚型特异性方法是否能提高辨别能力:在 3389 名接受过乳房 X 线照相筛查且后来被诊断为浸润性乳腺癌的女性中,我们以肿瘤亚型为结果,以已知的乳腺癌风险因素为预测因子,进行了多项式逻辑回归。肿瘤亚型是根据雌激素受体(ER)、孕激素受体(PR)和人表皮生长因子受体 2(HER2)的免疫组化表达来定义的。用接收者操作曲线下面积(AUC)评估鉴别。通过将盖尔绝对风险估计值与每种亚型的预测概率配比,估算出每种亚型的绝对风险。然后,我们比较了每种亚型风险最高十分位妇女的风险因素分布:共有 3,073 例 ER/PR+ HER2 -、340 例 ER/PR +HER2 +、126 例 ER/PR-ER2+ 和 300 例三阴性乳腺癌 (TNBC)。不同亚型的辨别能力不同;ER/PR-HER2+(AUC:0.64,95% CI 0.59,0.69)和 TNBC(AUC:0.64,95% CI 0.61,0.68)的辨别能力优于 ER/PR+HER2+(AUC:0.61,95% CI 0.58,0.64)。与其他亚型相比,TNBC 绝对风险高的患者更年轻,多为黑人,无乳腺癌家族史,体重指数较高。HER2+癌症绝对高风险患者更年轻,体重指数更低:我们的研究证明了一个概念,即对乳腺癌亚型进行分层风险预测可以识别出具有独特特征的患者,从而增加肿瘤亚型的风险。
Feasibility of risk assessment for breast cancer molecular subtypes.
Purpose: Few breast cancer risk assessment models account for the risk profiles of different tumor subtypes. This study evaluated whether a subtype-specific approach improves discrimination.
Methods: Among 3389 women who had a screening mammogram and were later diagnosed with invasive breast cancer we performed multinomial logistic regression with tumor subtype as the outcome and known breast cancer risk factors as predictors. Tumor subtypes were defined by expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) based on immunohistochemistry. Discrimination was assessed with the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Absolute risk of each subtype was estimated by proportioning Gail absolute risk estimates by the predicted probabilities for each subtype. We then compared risk factor distributions for women in the highest deciles of risk for each subtype.
Results: There were 3,073 ER/PR+ HER2 - , 340 ER/PR +HER2 + , 126 ER/PR-ER2+, and 300 triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC). Discrimination differed by subtype; ER/PR-HER2+ (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.59, 0.69) and TNBC (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.61, 0.68) had better discrimination than ER/PR+HER2+ (AUC: 0.61, 95% CI 0.58, 0.64). Compared to other subtypes, patients at high absolute risk of TNBC were younger, mostly Black, had no family history of breast cancer, and higher BMI. Those at high absolute risk of HER2+ cancers were younger and had lower BMI.
Conclusion: Our study provides proof of concept that stratifying risk prediction for breast cancer subtypes may enable identification of patients with unique profiles conferring increased risk for tumor subtypes.