Validation of a clinical breast cancer risk assessment tool combining a polygenic score for all ancestries with traditional risk factors

IF 6.6 1区 医学 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY Genetics in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.gim.2024.101128
Brent Mabey , Elisha Hughes , Matthew Kucera , Timothy Simmons , Brooke Hullinger , Holly J. Pederson , Lamis Yehia , Charis Eng , Judy Garber , Monique Gary , Ora Gordon , Jennifer R. Klemp , Semanti Mukherjee , Joseph Vijai , Kenneth Offit , Olufunmilayo I. Olopade , Sandhya Pruthi , Allison Kurian , Mark E. Robson , Pat W. Whitworth , Alexander Gutin
{"title":"Validation of a clinical breast cancer risk assessment tool combining a polygenic score for all ancestries with traditional risk factors","authors":"Brent Mabey ,&nbsp;Elisha Hughes ,&nbsp;Matthew Kucera ,&nbsp;Timothy Simmons ,&nbsp;Brooke Hullinger ,&nbsp;Holly J. Pederson ,&nbsp;Lamis Yehia ,&nbsp;Charis Eng ,&nbsp;Judy Garber ,&nbsp;Monique Gary ,&nbsp;Ora Gordon ,&nbsp;Jennifer R. Klemp ,&nbsp;Semanti Mukherjee ,&nbsp;Joseph Vijai ,&nbsp;Kenneth Offit ,&nbsp;Olufunmilayo I. Olopade ,&nbsp;Sandhya Pruthi ,&nbsp;Allison Kurian ,&nbsp;Mark E. Robson ,&nbsp;Pat W. Whitworth ,&nbsp;Alexander Gutin","doi":"10.1016/j.gim.2024.101128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>We previously described a combined risk score (CRS) that integrates a multiple-ancestry polygenic risk score (MA-PRS) with the Tyrer-Cuzick (TC) model to assess breast cancer (BC) risk. Here, we present a longitudinal validation of CRS in a real-world cohort.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study included 130,058 patients referred for hereditary cancer genetic testing and negative for germline pathogenic variants in BC-associated genes. Data were obtained by linking genetic test results to medical claims (median follow-up 12.1 months). CRS calibration was evaluated by the ratio of observed to expected BCs.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Three hundred forty BCs were observed over 148,349 patient-years. CRS was well-calibrated and demonstrated superior calibration compared with TC in high-risk deciles. MA-PRS alone had greater discriminatory accuracy than TC, and CRS had approximately 2-fold greater discriminatory accuracy than MA-PRS or TC. Among those classified as high risk by TC, 32.6% were low risk by CRS, and of those classified as low risk by TC, 4.3% were high risk by CRS. In cases where CRS and TC classifications disagreed, CRS was more accurate in predicting incident BC.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>CRS was well-calibrated and significantly improved BC risk stratification. Short-term follow-up suggests that clinical implementation of CRS should improve outcomes for patients of all ancestries through personalized risk-based screening and prevention.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12717,"journal":{"name":"Genetics in Medicine","volume":"26 7","pages":"Article 101128"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098360024000613/pdfft?md5=0062e60be32ca9cd24042faba911d08b&pid=1-s2.0-S1098360024000613-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098360024000613","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

We previously described a combined risk score (CRS) that integrates a multiple-ancestry polygenic risk score (MA-PRS) with the Tyrer-Cuzick (TC) model to assess breast cancer (BC) risk. Here, we present a longitudinal validation of CRS in a real-world cohort.

Methods

This study included 130,058 patients referred for hereditary cancer genetic testing and negative for germline pathogenic variants in BC-associated genes. Data were obtained by linking genetic test results to medical claims (median follow-up 12.1 months). CRS calibration was evaluated by the ratio of observed to expected BCs.

Results

Three hundred forty BCs were observed over 148,349 patient-years. CRS was well-calibrated and demonstrated superior calibration compared with TC in high-risk deciles. MA-PRS alone had greater discriminatory accuracy than TC, and CRS had approximately 2-fold greater discriminatory accuracy than MA-PRS or TC. Among those classified as high risk by TC, 32.6% were low risk by CRS, and of those classified as low risk by TC, 4.3% were high risk by CRS. In cases where CRS and TC classifications disagreed, CRS was more accurate in predicting incident BC.

Conclusion

CRS was well-calibrated and significantly improved BC risk stratification. Short-term follow-up suggests that clinical implementation of CRS should improve outcomes for patients of all ancestries through personalized risk-based screening and prevention.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将所有血统的多基因评分与传统风险因素相结合的临床乳腺癌风险评估工具的验证。
目的:我们之前介绍过一种综合风险评分(CRS),它将多房室多基因风险评分(MA-PRS)与泰勒-库齐克(TC)模型整合在一起,用于评估乳腺癌(BC)风险。在此,我们介绍了在真实世界队列中对 CRS 的纵向验证:这项研究包括 130,058 名转诊接受遗传性癌症基因检测且 BC 相关基因种系致病变异阴性的患者。数据是通过将基因检测结果与医疗索赔联系起来获得的(中位随访时间为 12.1 个月)。根据观察到的 BCs 与预期 BCs 的比率对 CRS 校准进行评估:结果:在 148,349 个患者年中观察到 340 例 BC。CRS校准良好,在高风险十分位数中与TC相比显示出更优越的校准效果。单用 MA-PRS 的判别准确性高于 TC,而 CRS 的判别准确性约为 MA-PRS 或 TC 的 2 倍。在通过 TC 分类为高风险的患者中,32.6% 通过 CRS 分类为低风险,而在通过 TC 分类为低风险的患者中,4.3% 通过 CRS 分类为高风险。在CRS和TC分类不一致的情况下,CRS在预测BC事件方面更为准确:结论:CRS校准良好,可显著改善BC风险分层。短期随访结果表明,临床实施CRS可通过个性化的基于风险的筛查和预防,改善所有血统患者的预后。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Genetics in Medicine
Genetics in Medicine 医学-遗传学
CiteScore
15.20
自引率
6.80%
发文量
857
审稿时长
1.3 weeks
期刊介绍: Genetics in Medicine (GIM) is the official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. The journal''s mission is to enhance the knowledge, understanding, and practice of medical genetics and genomics through publications in clinical and laboratory genetics and genomics, including ethical, legal, and social issues as well as public health. GIM encourages research that combats racism, includes diverse populations and is written by authors from diverse and underrepresented backgrounds.
期刊最新文献
RORA-neurodevelopmental disorder: a unique triad of developmental disability, cerebellar anomalies, and myoclonic seizures. Genomics-informed neuropsychiatric care for neurodevelopmental disorders: Results from a multidisciplinary clinic. Evolving knowledge of "red flag" clinical features associated with TTR p.(Val142Ile) in a diverse electronic health record-linked biobank. Evaluating Reproductive Carrier Screening using Biotinidase Deficiency as a Model: Variants Identified, Variant Rates and Management. The characterization of new de novo CACNA1G variants affecting the intracellular gate of Cav3.1 channel broadens the spectrum of neurodevelopmental phenotypes in SCA42ND.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1