Cargando…
Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for breast cancer chemoprevention and MRI screening involve estimates of remaining lifetime risk (RLR); in the United States, women with an RLR of 20% or higher meet “high-risk” criteria for MRI screening. METHODS: We prospectively followed 1764 women without breast c...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4554256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25956172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv124 |
_version_ | 1782388031565594624 |
---|---|
author | Quante, Anne S. Whittemore, Alice S. Shriver, Tom Hopper, John L. Strauch, Konstantin Terry, Mary Beth |
author_facet | Quante, Anne S. Whittemore, Alice S. Shriver, Tom Hopper, John L. Strauch, Konstantin Terry, Mary Beth |
author_sort | Quante, Anne S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for breast cancer chemoprevention and MRI screening involve estimates of remaining lifetime risk (RLR); in the United States, women with an RLR of 20% or higher meet “high-risk” criteria for MRI screening. METHODS: We prospectively followed 1764 women without breast cancer to compare the RLRs and 10-year risks assigned by the risk models International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS) and Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) and to compare both sets of model-assigned 10-year risks to subsequent incidence of breast cancer in the cohort. We used chi-square statistics to assess calibration and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to assess discrimination. All statistical tests are two-sided. RESULTS: The models classified different proportions of women as high-risk (IBIS = 59.3% vs BOADICEA = 20.1%) using the RLR threshold of 20%. The difference was smaller (IBIS = 52.9% vs BOADICEA = 43.2%) using a 10-year risk threshold of 3.34%. IBIS risks (mean = 4.9%) were better calibrated to observed breast cancer incidence (5.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.2% to 6.4%) than were those of BOADICEA (mean = 3.7%) overall and within quartiles of model risk (P = .20 by IBIS and P = .07 by BOADICEA). Both models gave similar discrimination, with AUCs of 0.67 (95% CI = 0.61 to 0.73) using IBIS and 0.68 (95% CI = 0.62 to 0.74) using BOADICEA. Model sensitivities at thresholds for a 20% false-positive rate were also similar, with 41.8% using IBIS and 38.0% using BOADICEA. CONCLUSION: RLR-based guidelines for high-risk women are limited by discordance between commonly used risk models. Guidelines based on short-term risks would be more useful, as models are generally developed and validated under a short fixed time horizon (≤10 years). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4554256 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45542562015-09-02 Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk Quante, Anne S. Whittemore, Alice S. Shriver, Tom Hopper, John L. Strauch, Konstantin Terry, Mary Beth J Natl Cancer Inst Article BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines for breast cancer chemoprevention and MRI screening involve estimates of remaining lifetime risk (RLR); in the United States, women with an RLR of 20% or higher meet “high-risk” criteria for MRI screening. METHODS: We prospectively followed 1764 women without breast cancer to compare the RLRs and 10-year risks assigned by the risk models International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS) and Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) and to compare both sets of model-assigned 10-year risks to subsequent incidence of breast cancer in the cohort. We used chi-square statistics to assess calibration and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to assess discrimination. All statistical tests are two-sided. RESULTS: The models classified different proportions of women as high-risk (IBIS = 59.3% vs BOADICEA = 20.1%) using the RLR threshold of 20%. The difference was smaller (IBIS = 52.9% vs BOADICEA = 43.2%) using a 10-year risk threshold of 3.34%. IBIS risks (mean = 4.9%) were better calibrated to observed breast cancer incidence (5.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.2% to 6.4%) than were those of BOADICEA (mean = 3.7%) overall and within quartiles of model risk (P = .20 by IBIS and P = .07 by BOADICEA). Both models gave similar discrimination, with AUCs of 0.67 (95% CI = 0.61 to 0.73) using IBIS and 0.68 (95% CI = 0.62 to 0.74) using BOADICEA. Model sensitivities at thresholds for a 20% false-positive rate were also similar, with 41.8% using IBIS and 38.0% using BOADICEA. CONCLUSION: RLR-based guidelines for high-risk women are limited by discordance between commonly used risk models. Guidelines based on short-term risks would be more useful, as models are generally developed and validated under a short fixed time horizon (≤10 years). Oxford University Press 2015-05-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4554256/ /pubmed/25956172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv124 Text en © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Article Quante, Anne S. Whittemore, Alice S. Shriver, Tom Hopper, John L. Strauch, Konstantin Terry, Mary Beth Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk |
title | Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk |
title_full | Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk |
title_fullStr | Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk |
title_full_unstemmed | Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk |
title_short | Practical Problems With Clinical Guidelines for Breast Cancer Prevention Based on Remaining Lifetime Risk |
title_sort | practical problems with clinical guidelines for breast cancer prevention based on remaining lifetime risk |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4554256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25956172 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv124 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT quanteannes practicalproblemswithclinicalguidelinesforbreastcancerpreventionbasedonremaininglifetimerisk AT whittemorealices practicalproblemswithclinicalguidelinesforbreastcancerpreventionbasedonremaininglifetimerisk AT shrivertom practicalproblemswithclinicalguidelinesforbreastcancerpreventionbasedonremaininglifetimerisk AT hopperjohnl practicalproblemswithclinicalguidelinesforbreastcancerpreventionbasedonremaininglifetimerisk AT strauchkonstantin practicalproblemswithclinicalguidelinesforbreastcancerpreventionbasedonremaininglifetimerisk AT terrymarybeth practicalproblemswithclinicalguidelinesforbreastcancerpreventionbasedonremaininglifetimerisk |