Joe Dennis

Evaluating the performance of the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence Algorithm model in predicting 10-year breast cancer risks in UK Biobank

Abstract Background The Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence Algorithm (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 (6838 incident breast cancers) aged 40-70 years of self-reported White ethnicity with no previous cancer from the UK Biobank. Age-specific risk classification was assessed using relative risk thresholds equivalent to the absolute lifetime risk categories of less than 17%, 17%-30%, and 30% or more, 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–single nucleotide polymorphisms polygenic score, and pathogenic variants. Mammographic density data were not available. Results The polygenic risk score was the most discriminative risk factor (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.65). Discrimination was highest when considering all risk factors (AUC = 0.66). The model was well calibrated overall (expected-to-observed ratio = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97 to 1.02; calibration slope = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.00), and in deciles of predicted risks. Discrimination was similar in women aged younger and older than 50 years. There was some underprediction in women aged younger than 50 years (expected-to-observed ratio = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.94; calibration slope = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.94 to 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 relative risk categories less than 1.6, 1.6-3.1, and at least 3.1, identifying 25.6% of incident breast cancer patients in category relative risk of at least 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.

Validation of the BOADICEA model for epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer risk prediction in UK Biobank

Abstract Background The clinical validity of the multifactorial BOADICEA model for epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer (EOC) risk prediction has not been assessed in a large sample size or over a longer term. Methods We evaluated the model discrimination and calibration in the UK Biobank cohort comprising 199,429 women (733 incident EOCs) of European ancestry without previous cancer history. We predicted 10-year EOC risk incorporating data on questionnaire-based risk factors (QRFs), family history, a 36-SNP polygenic risk score and pathogenic variants (PV) in six EOC susceptibility genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1 and PALB2). Results Discriminative ability was maximised under the multifactorial model that included all risk factors (AUC = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.66–0.70). This model was well calibrated in deciles of predicted risk with calibration slope=0.99 (95% CI: 0.98–1.01). Discriminative ability was similar in women younger or older than 60 years. The AUC was higher when analyses were restricted to PV carriers (0.76, 95% CI: 0.69–0.82). Using relative risk (RR) thresholds, the full model classified 97.7%, 1.7%, 0.4% and 0.2% women in the RR < 2.0, 2.0 ≤ RR < 2.9, 2.9 ≤ RR < 6.0 and RR ≥ 6.0 categories, respectively, identifying 9.1 of incident EOC among those with RR ≥ 2.0. Discussion BOADICEA, implemented in CanRisk (www.canrisk.org), provides valid 10-year EOC risks and can facilitate clinical decision-making in EOC risk management.

Ovarian and Breast Cancer Risks Associated With Pathogenic Variants in RAD51C and RAD51D

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to estimate precise age-specific tubo-ovarian carcinoma (TOC) and breast cancer (BC) risks for carriers of pathogenic variants in RAD51C and RAD51D. Methods We analyzed data from 6178 families, 125 with pathogenic variants in RAD51C, and 6690 families, 60 with pathogenic variants in RAD51D. TOC and BC relative and cumulative risks were estimated using complex segregation analysis to model the cancer inheritance patterns in families while adjusting for the mode of ascertainment of each family. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Pathogenic variants in both RAD51C and RAD51D were associated with TOC (RAD51C: relative risk [RR] = 7.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.60 to 10.19; P = 5 × 10-40; RAD51D: RR = 7.60, 95% CI = 5.61 to 10.30; P = 5 × 10-39) and BC (RAD51C: RR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.39 to 2.85; P = 1.55 × 10-4; RAD51D: RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.72; P = .002). For both RAD51C and RAD51D, there was a suggestion that the TOC relative risks increased with age until around age 60 years and decreased thereafter. The estimated cumulative risks of developing TOC to age 80 years were 11% (95% CI = 6% to 21%) for RAD51C and 13% (95% CI = 7% to 23%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. The estimated cumulative risks of developing BC to 80 years were 21% (95% CI = 15% to 29%) for RAD51C and 20% (95% CI = 14% to 28%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. Both TOC and BC risks for RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers varied by cancer family history and could be as high as 32–36% for TOC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with TOC, or 44–46% for BC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with BC. Conclusions These estimates will facilitate the genetic counseling of RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers and justify the incorporation of RAD51C and RAD51D into cancer risk prediction models.

Copy Number Variants Are Ovarian Cancer Risk Alleles at Known and Novel Risk Loci

AbstractBackgroundKnown risk alleles for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) account for approximately 40% of the heritability for EOC. Copy number variants (CNVs) have not been investigated as EOC risk alleles in a large population cohort.MethodsSingle nucleotide polymorphism array data from 13 071 EOC cases and 17 306 controls of White European ancestry were used to identify CNVs associated with EOC risk using a rare admixture maximum likelihood test for gene burden and a by-probe ratio test. We performed enrichment analysis of CNVs at known EOC risk loci and functional biofeatures in ovarian cancer–related cell types.ResultsWe identified statistically significant risk associations with CNVs at known EOC risk genes; BRCA1 (PEOC = 1.60E-21; OREOC = 8.24), RAD51C (Phigh-grade serous ovarian cancer [HGSOC] = 5.5E-4; odds ratio [OR]HGSOC = 5.74 del), and BRCA2 (PHGSOC = 7.0E-4; ORHGSOC = 3.31 deletion). Four suggestive associations (P < .001) were identified for rare CNVs. Risk-associated CNVs were enriched (P < .05) at known EOC risk loci identified by genome-wide association study. Noncoding CNVs were enriched in active promoters and insulators in EOC-related cell types.ConclusionsCNVs in BRCA1 have been previously reported in smaller studies, but their observed frequency in this large population-based cohort, along with the CNVs observed at BRCA2 and RAD51C gene loci in EOC cases, suggests that these CNVs are potentially pathogenic and may contribute to the spectrum of disease-causing mutations in these genes. CNVs are likely to occur in a wider set of susceptibility regions, with potential implications for clinical genetic testing and disease prevention.

Adapting the BOADICEA breast and ovarian cancer risk models for the ethnically diverse UK population

Abstract Background BOADICEA is a widely used algorithm for predicting breast and ovarian cancer risks, using a combination of genetic and lifestyle, hormonal and reproductive risk factors. However, it has largely been developed using data from White/European individuals, limiting its applicability to other ethnicities. Here, we updated BOADICEA to provide ethnicity-specific risk estimates. Methods We utilised data from multiple sources to derive estimates for the distributions and effect sizes of risk factors in major UK ethnic groups (White, Black, South Asian, East Asian, and Mixed), along with ethnicity-specific population cancer incidences. We also developed a method for deriving adjusted polygenic scores for individuals of mixed genetic ancestry. Results The predicted average absolute risks were smaller in all non-White ethnic groups than in Whites, and the risk distributions were narrower. The proportion of women classified as at moderate or high risk of breast or ovarian cancer, according to national guidelines, was considerably smaller in non-Whites. Discussion The updated BOADICEA, available in the CanRisk tool ( www.canrisk.org ), is based on more appropriate estimates for non-White women in the UK. Further validation of the model in prospective studies is required. Considering these findings, risk classification guidelines for non-White women may need to be revised.