Carmen Petitjean, Naomi Wilcox, Lorenzo Ficorella, Joe Dennis, Jonathan Tyrer, Michael Lush, Jacques Simard, Douglas Easton, Antonis C Antoniou, Xin Yang
{"title":"评估BOADICEA模型在预测英国生物银行10年乳腺癌风险中的表现","authors":"Carmen Petitjean, Naomi Wilcox, Lorenzo Ficorella, Joe Dennis, Jonathan Tyrer, Michael Lush, Jacques Simard, Douglas Easton, Antonis C Antoniou, Xin Yang","doi":"10.1093/jnci/djae335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background The BOADICEA model predicts breast cancer risk using cancer family history, epidemiological and genetic data. We evaluated its validity in a large prospective cohort. Methods We assessed model calibration, discrimination and risk classification ability in 217,885 women (6,838 incident breast cancers) aged 40-70 years old of self-reported White ethnicity with no previous cancer from the UK Biobank. Age-specific risk classification was assessed using relative risk (RR) thresholds equivalent to the absolute lifetime risk categories of < 17%, 17-30% and ≥30%, recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. We predicted 10-year risks using BOADICEA v.6 considering cancer family history, questionnaire-based risk factors, a 313-SNP polygenic score and pathogenic variants. Mammographic density data were not available. Results The PRS was the most discriminative risk factor (AUC=0.65). Discrimination was highest when considering all risk factors (AUC=0.66). The model was well calibrated overall (E/O=0.99, 95%CI=0.97-1.02; calibration slope=0.99, 95%CI:0.99-1.00), and in deciles of predicted risks. Discrimination was similar in women younger and older than 50 years. There was some underprediction in women under age 50 (E/O=0.89, 95%CI=0.84-0.94; calibration slope=0.96, 95%CI:0.94-0.97), which was explained by the higher breast cancer incidence in UK Biobank than the UK population incidence in this age group. The model classified 87.2%, 11.4% and 1.4% of women in RR categories <1.6, 1.6-3.1 and ≥3.1, identifying 25.6% of incident breast cancer cases in category RR ≥ 1.6. Conclusion BOADICEA, implemented in CanRisk (www.canrisk.org), provides valid 10-year breast cancer risk which can facilitate risk-stratified screening and personalized breast cancer risk management.","PeriodicalId":501635,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the performance of the BOADICEA model in predicting 10-year breast cancer risks in UK Biobank\",\"authors\":\"Carmen Petitjean, Naomi Wilcox, Lorenzo Ficorella, Joe Dennis, Jonathan Tyrer, Michael Lush, Jacques Simard, Douglas Easton, Antonis C Antoniou, Xin Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jnci/djae335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background The BOADICEA model predicts breast cancer risk using cancer family history, epidemiological and genetic data. We evaluated its validity in a large prospective cohort. Methods We assessed model calibration, discrimination and risk classification ability in 217,885 women (6,838 incident breast cancers) aged 40-70 years old of self-reported White ethnicity with no previous cancer from the UK Biobank. Age-specific risk classification was assessed using relative risk (RR) thresholds equivalent to the absolute lifetime risk categories of < 17%, 17-30% and ≥30%, recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. We predicted 10-year risks using BOADICEA v.6 considering cancer family history, questionnaire-based risk factors, a 313-SNP polygenic score and pathogenic variants. Mammographic density data were not available. Results The PRS was the most discriminative risk factor (AUC=0.65). Discrimination was highest when considering all risk factors (AUC=0.66). The model was well calibrated overall (E/O=0.99, 95%CI=0.97-1.02; calibration slope=0.99, 95%CI:0.99-1.00), and in deciles of predicted risks. Discrimination was similar in women younger and older than 50 years. There was some underprediction in women under age 50 (E/O=0.89, 95%CI=0.84-0.94; calibration slope=0.96, 95%CI:0.94-0.97), which was explained by the higher breast cancer incidence in UK Biobank than the UK population incidence in this age group. The model classified 87.2%, 11.4% and 1.4% of women in RR categories <1.6, 1.6-3.1 and ≥3.1, identifying 25.6% of incident breast cancer cases in category RR ≥ 1.6. Conclusion BOADICEA, implemented in CanRisk (www.canrisk.org), provides valid 10-year breast cancer risk which can facilitate risk-stratified screening and personalized breast cancer risk management.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501635,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the National Cancer Institute\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the National Cancer Institute\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae335\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae335","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the performance of the BOADICEA model in predicting 10-year breast cancer risks in UK Biobank
Background The BOADICEA model predicts breast cancer risk using cancer family history, epidemiological and genetic data. We evaluated its validity in a large prospective cohort. Methods We assessed model calibration, discrimination and risk classification ability in 217,885 women (6,838 incident breast cancers) aged 40-70 years old of self-reported White ethnicity with no previous cancer from the UK Biobank. Age-specific risk classification was assessed using relative risk (RR) thresholds equivalent to the absolute lifetime risk categories of < 17%, 17-30% and ≥30%, recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. We predicted 10-year risks using BOADICEA v.6 considering cancer family history, questionnaire-based risk factors, a 313-SNP polygenic score and pathogenic variants. Mammographic density data were not available. Results The PRS was the most discriminative risk factor (AUC=0.65). Discrimination was highest when considering all risk factors (AUC=0.66). The model was well calibrated overall (E/O=0.99, 95%CI=0.97-1.02; calibration slope=0.99, 95%CI:0.99-1.00), and in deciles of predicted risks. Discrimination was similar in women younger and older than 50 years. There was some underprediction in women under age 50 (E/O=0.89, 95%CI=0.84-0.94; calibration slope=0.96, 95%CI:0.94-0.97), which was explained by the higher breast cancer incidence in UK Biobank than the UK population incidence in this age group. The model classified 87.2%, 11.4% and 1.4% of women in RR categories <1.6, 1.6-3.1 and ≥3.1, identifying 25.6% of incident breast cancer cases in category RR ≥ 1.6. Conclusion BOADICEA, implemented in CanRisk (www.canrisk.org), provides valid 10-year breast cancer risk which can facilitate risk-stratified screening and personalized breast cancer risk management.