Shu Jiang, Debbie L Bennett, Bernard A Rosner, Rulla M Tamimi, Graham A Colditz
{"title":"基于重复乳房x光检查的动态5年乳腺癌风险模型的建立与验证。","authors":"Shu Jiang, Debbie L Bennett, Bernard A Rosner, Rulla M Tamimi, Graham A Colditz","doi":"10.1200/CCI-24-00200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Current image-based long-term risk prediction models do not fully use previous screening mammogram images. Dynamic prediction models have not been investigated for use in routine care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed a prospective WashU clinic-based cohort of 10,099 cancer-free women at entry (between November 3, 2008 and February 2012). Follow-up through 2020 identified 478 pathology-confirmed breast cancers (BCs). The cohort included 27% Black women. An external validation cohort (Emory) included 18,360 women screened from 2013, followed through 2020. This included 42% Black women and 332 pathology-confirmed BC excluding those diagnosed within 6 months of screening. We trained a dynamic model using repeated screening mammograms at WashU to predict 5-year risk. This opportunistic screening service presented a range of mammogram images for each woman. We applied the model to the external validation data to evaluate discrimination performance (AUC) and calibrated to US SEER.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using 3 years of previous mammogram images available at the current screening visit, we obtained a 5-year AUC of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.83) in the external validation. This represents a significant improvement over the current visit mammogram AUC 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; <i>P</i> < .01) in the same women. When calibrated, a risk ratio of 21.1 was observed comparing high (>4%) to very low (<0.3%) 5-year risk. The dynamic model classified 16% of the cohort as high risk among whom 61% of all BCs were diagnosed. The dynamic model performed comparably in Black and White women.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adding previous screening mammogram images improves 5-year BC risk prediction beyond static models. It can identify women at high risk who might benefit from supplemental screening or risk-reduction strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":51626,"journal":{"name":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","volume":"8 ","pages":"e2400200"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11634085/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and Validation of Dynamic 5-Year Breast Cancer Risk Model Using Repeated Mammograms.\",\"authors\":\"Shu Jiang, Debbie L Bennett, Bernard A Rosner, Rulla M Tamimi, Graham A Colditz\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/CCI-24-00200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Current image-based long-term risk prediction models do not fully use previous screening mammogram images. Dynamic prediction models have not been investigated for use in routine care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed a prospective WashU clinic-based cohort of 10,099 cancer-free women at entry (between November 3, 2008 and February 2012). Follow-up through 2020 identified 478 pathology-confirmed breast cancers (BCs). The cohort included 27% Black women. An external validation cohort (Emory) included 18,360 women screened from 2013, followed through 2020. This included 42% Black women and 332 pathology-confirmed BC excluding those diagnosed within 6 months of screening. We trained a dynamic model using repeated screening mammograms at WashU to predict 5-year risk. This opportunistic screening service presented a range of mammogram images for each woman. We applied the model to the external validation data to evaluate discrimination performance (AUC) and calibrated to US SEER.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using 3 years of previous mammogram images available at the current screening visit, we obtained a 5-year AUC of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.83) in the external validation. This represents a significant improvement over the current visit mammogram AUC 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; <i>P</i> < .01) in the same women. When calibrated, a risk ratio of 21.1 was observed comparing high (>4%) to very low (<0.3%) 5-year risk. The dynamic model classified 16% of the cohort as high risk among whom 61% of all BCs were diagnosed. The dynamic model performed comparably in Black and White women.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adding previous screening mammogram images improves 5-year BC risk prediction beyond static models. It can identify women at high risk who might benefit from supplemental screening or risk-reduction strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"e2400200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11634085/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI-24-00200\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI-24-00200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Development and Validation of Dynamic 5-Year Breast Cancer Risk Model Using Repeated Mammograms.
Purpose: Current image-based long-term risk prediction models do not fully use previous screening mammogram images. Dynamic prediction models have not been investigated for use in routine care.
Methods: We analyzed a prospective WashU clinic-based cohort of 10,099 cancer-free women at entry (between November 3, 2008 and February 2012). Follow-up through 2020 identified 478 pathology-confirmed breast cancers (BCs). The cohort included 27% Black women. An external validation cohort (Emory) included 18,360 women screened from 2013, followed through 2020. This included 42% Black women and 332 pathology-confirmed BC excluding those diagnosed within 6 months of screening. We trained a dynamic model using repeated screening mammograms at WashU to predict 5-year risk. This opportunistic screening service presented a range of mammogram images for each woman. We applied the model to the external validation data to evaluate discrimination performance (AUC) and calibrated to US SEER.
Results: Using 3 years of previous mammogram images available at the current screening visit, we obtained a 5-year AUC of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.83) in the external validation. This represents a significant improvement over the current visit mammogram AUC 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; P < .01) in the same women. When calibrated, a risk ratio of 21.1 was observed comparing high (>4%) to very low (<0.3%) 5-year risk. The dynamic model classified 16% of the cohort as high risk among whom 61% of all BCs were diagnosed. The dynamic model performed comparably in Black and White women.
Conclusion: Adding previous screening mammogram images improves 5-year BC risk prediction beyond static models. It can identify women at high risk who might benefit from supplemental screening or risk-reduction strategies.