Cargando…

Integration of a Cross-Ancestry Polygenic Model With Clinical Risk Factors Improves Breast Cancer Risk Stratification

To develop and validate a cross-ancestry integrated risk score (caIRS) that combines a cross-ancestry polygenic risk score (caPRS) with a clinical estimator for breast cancer (BC) risk. We hypothesized that the caIRS is a better predictor of BC risk than clinical risk factors across diverse ancestry...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tshiaba, Placede T., Ratman, Dariusz K., Sun, Jiayi M., Tunstall, Tate S., Levy, Brynn, Shah, Premal S., Weitzel, Jeffrey N., Rabinowitz, Matthew, Kumar, Akash, Im, Kate M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10309538/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36809055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/PO.22.00447
Descripción
Sumario:To develop and validate a cross-ancestry integrated risk score (caIRS) that combines a cross-ancestry polygenic risk score (caPRS) with a clinical estimator for breast cancer (BC) risk. We hypothesized that the caIRS is a better predictor of BC risk than clinical risk factors across diverse ancestry groups. METHODS: We used diverse retrospective cohort data with longitudinal follow-up to develop a caPRS and integrate it with the Tyrer-Cuzick (T-C) clinical model. We tested the association between the caIRS and BC risk in two validation cohorts including > 130,000 women. We compared model discrimination for 5-year and remaining lifetime BC risk between the caIRS and T-C and assessed how the caIRS would affect screening in the clinic. RESULTS: The caIRS outperformed T-C alone for all populations tested in both validation cohorts and contributed significantly to risk prediction beyond T-C. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved from 0.57 to 0.65, and the odds ratio per standard deviation increased from 1.35 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.43) to 1.79 (95% CI, 1.70 to 1.88) in validation cohort 1 with similar improvements observed in validation cohort 2. We observed the largest gain in positive predictive value using the caIRS in Black/African American women across both validation cohorts, with an approximately two-fold increase and an equivalent negative predictive value as the T-C. In a multivariate, age-adjusted logistic regression model including both caIRS and T-C, caIRS remained significant, indicating that caIRS provides information over T-C alone. CONCLUSION: Adding a caPRS to the T-C model improves BC risk stratification for women of multiple ancestries, which could have implications for screening recommendations and prevention.