Article

Prediction of BRCA Mutations Using the BRCAPRO Model in Clinic-Based African American, Hispanic, and Other Minority Families in the United States

Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 03/2009; 27(8):1184-90. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.5869
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BRCAPRO, a BRCA mutation carrier prediction model, was developed on the basis of studies in individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish and European ancestry. We evaluated the performance of the BRCAPRO model among clinic-based minority families. We also assessed the clinical utility of mutation status of probands (the first individual tested in a family) in the recommendation of BRCA mutation testing for other at-risk family members.
A total of 292 minority families with at least one member who was tested for BRCA mutations were identified through the Breast Cancer Family Registry and the University of Chicago. Using the BRCAPRO model, the predicted likelihood of carrying BRCA mutations was generated. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were calculated.
There were 104 African American, 130 Hispanic, 37 Asian-American, and 21 other minority families. The AUC was 0.748 (95% CI, 0.672 to 0.823) for all minorities combined. There was a statistically nonsignificant trend for BRCAPRO to perform better in Hispanic families than in other minority families. After taking into account the mutation status of probands, BRCAPRO performance in additional tested family members was improved: the AUC increased from 0.760 to 0.902.
The findings support the use of BRCAPRO in pretest BRCA mutation prediction among minority families in clinical settings, but there is room for improvement in ethnic groups other than Hispanics. Knowledge of the mutation status of the proband provides additional predictive value, which may guide genetic counselors in recommending BRCA testing of additional relatives when a proband has tested negative.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
65 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSETo determine the prevalence and type of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) mutations among Hispanics in the Southwestern United States and their potential impact on genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). PATIENTS AND METHODS Hispanics (n = 746) with a personal or family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved registry and received GCRA and BRCA testing within a consortium of 14 clinics. Population-based Hispanic breast cancer cases (n = 492) enrolled in the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry, negative by sequencing for BRCA mutations, were analyzed for the presence of the BRCA1 ex9-12del large rearrangement.ResultsDeleterious BRCA mutations were detected in 189 (25%) of 746 familial clinic patients (124 BRCA1, 65 BRCA2); 21 (11%) of 189 were large rearrangement mutations, of which 62% (13 of 21) were BRCA1 ex9-12del. Nine recurrent mutations accounted for 53% of the total. Among these, BRCA1 ex9-12del seems to be a Mexican founder mutation and represents 10% to 12% of all BRCA1 mutations in clinic- and population-based cohorts in the United States. CONCLUSIONBRCA mutations were prevalent in the largest study of Hispanic breast and/or ovarian cancer families in the United States to date, and a significant proportion were large rearrangement mutations. The high frequency of large rearrangement mutations warrants screening in every case. We document the first Mexican founder mutation (BRCA1 ex9-12del), which, along with other recurrent mutations, suggests the potential for a cost-effective panel approach to ancestry-informed GCRA.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 12/2012; 31(2). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2011.41.0027 · 17.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Clinicians use different breast cancer risk models for patients considered at average and above-average risk, based largely on their family histories and genetic factors. We used longitudinal cohort data from women whose breast cancer risks span the full spectrum to determine the genetic and nongenetic covariates that differentiate the performance of two commonly used models that include nongenetic factors - BCRAT, also called Gail model, generally used for patients with average risk and IBIS, also called Tyrer Cuzick model, generally used for patients with above-average risk. Methods We evaluated the performance of the BCRAT and IBIS models as currently applied in clinical settings for 10-year absolute risk of breast cancer, using prospective data from 1,857 women over a mean follow-up length of 8.1 years, of whom 83 developed cancer. This cohort spans the continuum of breast cancer risk, with some subjects at lower than average population risk. Therefore, the wide variation in individual risk makes it an interesting population to examine model performance across subgroups of women. For model calibration, we divided the cohort into quartiles of model-assigned risk and compared differences between assigned and observed risks using the Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) chi-squared statistic. For model discrimination, we computed the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) and the case risk percentiles (CRPs). Results The 10-year risks assigned by BCRAT and IBIS differed (range of difference 0.001 to 79.5). The mean BCRAT- and IBIS-assigned risks of 3.18% and 5.49%, respectively, were lower than the cohort's 10-year cumulative probability of developing breast cancer (6.25%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.0 to 7.8%). Agreement between assigned and observed risks was better for IBIS (HL X42 = 7.2, P value 0.13) than BCRAT (HL X42 = 22.0, P value <0.001). The IBIS model also showed better discrimination (AUC = 69.5%, CI = 63.8% to 75.2%) than did the BCRAT model (AUC = 63.2%, CI = 57.6% to 68.9%). In almost all covariate-specific subgroups, BCRAT mean risks were significantly lower than the observed risks, while IBIS risks showed generally good agreement with observed risks, even in the subgroups of women considered at average risk (for example, no family history of breast cancer, BRCA1/2 mutation negative). Conclusions Models developed using extended family history and genetic data, such as the IBIS model, also perform well in women considered at average risk (for example, no family history of breast cancer, BRCA1/2 mutation negative). Extending such models to include additional nongenetic information may improve performance in women across the breast cancer risk continuum.
    Breast Cancer Research 01/2012; 14(6). DOI:10.1186/bcr3352 · 5.33 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Approximately 7% of all breast cancer cases are associated with hereditary predisposition and BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene, which accounts for half of the hereditary breast cancer (HBC). Although majority of breast cancer occur sporadically, identification of HBC is important in that active adoption of preventive strategies such as surveillance, chemoprevention, and risk-reducing surgery will result in the gain of life-expectancy. According to the recent studies, the prevalence and penetrance of BRCA mutation in Korean breast cancer patients are comparable to that of western countries. Genetic testing should be done in the setting of genetic counseling, which provides the patients with comprehensive information about the test procedure, the interpretation of the test result, and possible options when the test results were positive for mutation. The management of HBC is not different from that of sporadic cancer and many clinical trials investigating the chemoprevention and targeted therapy of HBC are underway. The Korean Hereditary Breast Cancer (KOHBRA) study is a nationwide multicenter study to reveal the prevalence of BRCA mutation in Korean breast cancer patients. After the completion of the KOHBRA study, we expect important basic data which will be the backbone of clinical practice guideline for Korean HBC patients.
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association 01/2009; 52(10). DOI:10.5124/jkma.2009.52.10.952 · 0.18 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
9 Downloads
Available from
May 19, 2014