Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography.

Cancer Research and Biostatistics, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1900, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment (Impact Factor: 15.16). 09/2006; 98(17):1204-14. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djj331
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Risk prediction models for breast cancer can be improved by the addition of recently identified risk factors, including breast density and use of hormone therapy. We used prospective risk information to predict a diagnosis of breast cancer in a cohort of 1 million women undergoing screening mammography.
There were 2,392,998 eligible screening mammograms from women without previously diagnosed breast cancer who had had a prior mammogram in the preceding 5 years. Within 1 year of the screening mammogram, 11,638 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Separate logistic regression risk models were constructed for premenopausal and postmenopausal examinations by use of a stringent (P<.0001) criterion for the inclusion of risk factors. Risk models were constructed with 75% of the data and validated with the remaining 25%. Concordance of the predicted with the observed outcomes was assessed by a concordance (c) statistic after logistic regression model fit. All statistical tests were two-sided.
Statistically significant risk factors for breast cancer diagnosis among premenopausal women included age, breast density, family history of breast cancer, and a prior breast procedure. For postmenopausal women, the statistically significant factors included age, breast density, race, ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, a prior breast procedure, body mass index, natural menopause, hormone therapy, and a prior false-positive mammogram. The model may identify high-risk women better than the Gail model, although predictive accuracy was only moderate. The c statistics were 0.631 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.618 to 0.644) for premenopausal women and 0.624 (95% CI = 0.619 to 0.630) for postmenopausal women.
Breast density is a strong additional risk factor for breast cancer, although it is unknown whether reduction in breast density would reduce risk. Our risk model may be able to identify women at high risk for breast cancer for preventive interventions or more intensive surveillance.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: False-positives are a major concern in breast cancer screening. However, false-positives have been little evaluated as a prognostic factor for cancer detection. Our aim was to evaluate the association of false-positive results with the cancer detection risk in subsequent screening participations over a 17-year period. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 762,506 women aged 45-69 years, with at least two screening participations, who underwent 2,594,146 screening mammograms from 1990 to 2006. Multilevel discrete-time hazard models were used to estimate the adjusted odds ratios (OR) of breast cancer detection in subsequent screening participations in women with false-positive results. Results: False-positives involving a fine-needle aspiration cytology or a biopsy had a higher cancer detection risk than those involving additional imaging procedures alone (OR=2.69; 95%CI: 2.28-3.16 and OR=1.81; 95%CI: 1.70-1.94, respectively). The risk of cancer detection increased substantially if women with cytology or biopsy had a familial history of breast cancer (OR=4.64; 95%CI: 3.23-6.66). Other factors associated with an increased cancer detection risk were age 65-69 years (OR=1.84; 95%CI: 1.67-2.03), non-attendance at the previous screening invitation (OR=1.26; 95%CI: 1.11-1.43), and having undergone a previous benign biopsy outside the screening program (OR=1.24; 95%CI: 1.13-1.35). Conclusion: Women with a false-positive test have an increased risk of cancer detection in subsequent screening participations, especially those with a false-positive result involving cytology or biopsy. Understanding the factors behind this association could provide valuable information to increase the effectiveness of breast cancer screening.
    11/2012; 37(1). DOI:10.1016/j.canep.2012.10.004
  • Source
    The International Conference on Data Mining; 01/2011
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The majority of candidates for breast cancer prevention have not accepted tamoxifen because of the perception of an unfavorable risk/benefit ratio and the acceptance of raloxifene remains to be determined. One means of improving this ratio is to identify women at very high risk of breast cancer. Family history, age, atypia in a benign biopsy, and reproductive factors are the main parameters currently used to determine risk. The most powerful risk factor, mammographic density, is not presently employed routinely. Other potentially important factors are plasma estrogen and androgen levels, bone density, weight gain, age of menopause, and fracture history, which are also not currently used in a comprehensive risk prediction model because of lack of prospective validation. The Breast Cancer Prevention Collaborative Group (BCPCG) met to critically examine and prioritize risk factors that might be selected for further testing by multivariate analysis using existing clinical material. The BCPCG reached a consensus that quantitative breast density, state of the art plasma estrogen and androgen measurements, history of fracture and height loss, BMI, and waist-hip ratio had sufficient priority for further testing. As a practical approach, these parameters could be added to the existing Tyrer-Cuzick model which encompasses factors included in both the Claus and Gail models. The BCPCG analyzed potentially available clinical material from previous prospective studies and determined that a large case/control study to evaluate these new factors might be feasible at this time.
    Endocrine Related Cancer 07/2007; 14(2):169-87. DOI:10.1677/ERC-06-0045 · 4.91 Impact Factor