Xin Yang

Incorporating Continuous Mammographic Density Into the BOADICEA Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model

PURPOSE Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA v7) predicts future breast cancer (BC) risk using data on cancer family history (FH), genetic markers, questionnaire-based risk factors, and mammographic density (MD) measured using the four-category Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) classification. However, BIRADS requires manual reading, which is impractical on a large scale and may cause information loss. We extended BOADICEA to incorporate continuous MD measurements, calculated using the automated Volpara and STRATUS tools. METHODS We used data from the Karolinska Mammography Project for Risk Prediction of Breast Cancer cohort (60,276 participants; 1,167 incident BC). Associations between MD measurements and BC risk were estimated in a randomly selected training subset (two thirds of the data set). Percent MD residuals were calculated after regressing on age at mammography and BMI. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for FH and BOADICEA risk factors, and were incorporated into BOADICEA. The remaining one third of the cohort was used to assess the performance of the extended BOADICEA (v7.2) in predicting 5-year risks. RESULTS The BC HRs per standard deviation of residual STRATUS density were estimated to be 1.48 (95% CI, 1.33 to 1.64) and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.56) for pre- and postmenopausal women, respectively. The corresponding estimates for Volpara density were 1.27 (95% CI, 1.15 to 1.40) and 1.38 (95% CI, 1.25 to 1.54). The extended BOADICEA showed improved discrimination in the testing data set over using BIRADS, with a 1%-4% increase in AUC across different combinations of risk factors. On the basis of 5-year BC risk with MD as the sole input, approximately 11% of the women were reclassified into lower risk categories and 18% into higher risk categories using the extended model. CONCLUSION Incorporating continuous MD measurements into BOADICEA enhances BC risk stratification and facilitates the use of automated MD measures for risk prediction.

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.

Validation of the BOADICEA model in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers

Background No validation has been conducted for the BOADICEA multifactorial breast cancer risk prediction model specifically in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers to date. Here, we evaluated the performance of BOADICEA in predicting 5-year breast cancer risks in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 PV carriers ascertained through clinical genetic centres. Methods We evaluated the model calibration and discriminatory ability in the prospective TRANsIBCCS cohort study comprising 1614 BRCA1 and 1365 BRCA2 PV carriers (209 incident cases). Study participants had lifestyle, reproductive, hormonal, anthropometric risk factor information, a polygenic risk score based on 313 SNPs and family history information. Results The full multifactorial model considering family history together with all other risk factors was well calibrated overall (E/O=1.07, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.24) and in quintiles of predicted risk. Discrimination was maximised when all risk factors were considered (Harrell’s C-index=0.70, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.74; area under the curve=0.79, 95% CI: 0.76 to 0.82). The model performance was similar when evaluated separately in BRCA1 or BRCA2 PV carriers. The full model identified 5.8%, 12.9% and 24.0% of BRCA1/2 PV carriers with 5-year breast cancer risks of <1.65%, <3% and <5%, respectively, risk thresholds commonly used for different management and risk-reduction options. Conclusion BOADICEA may be used to aid personalised cancer risk management and decision-making for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers. It is implemented in the free-access CanRisk tool ( https://www.canrisk.org/ ).

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.

Comprehensive epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and epidemiological risk factors

Background Epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer (EOC) has high mortality partly due to late diagnosis. Prevention is available but may be associated with adverse effects. A multifactorial risk model based on known genetic and epidemiological risk factors (RFs) for EOC can help identify women at higher risk who could benefit from targeted screening and prevention. Methods We developed a multifactorial EOC risk model for women of European ancestry incorporating the effects of pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 , BRCA2 , RAD51C , RAD51D and BRIP1 , a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) of arbitrary size, the effects of RFs and explicit family history (FH) using a synthetic model approach. The PRS, PV and RFs were assumed to act multiplicatively. Results Based on a currently available PRS for EOC that explains 5% of the EOC polygenic variance, the estimated lifetime risks under the multifactorial model in the general population vary from 0.5% to 4.6% for the first to 99th percentiles of the EOC risk distribution. The corresponding range for women with an affected first-degree relative is 1.9%–10.3%. Based on the combined risk distribution, 33% of RAD51D PV carriers are expected to have a lifetime EOC risk of less than 10%. RFs provided the widest distribution, followed by the PRS. In an independent partial model validation, absolute and relative 5-year risks were well calibrated in quintiles of predicted risk. Conclusion This multifactorial risk model can facilitate stratification, in particular among women with FH of cancer and/or moderate-risk and high-risk PVs. The model is available via the CanRisk Tool ( www.canrisk.org ).

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.