Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gim.2023.100917
DC FieldValue
dc.titleBreast cancer risk stratification using genetic and non-genetic risk assessment tools for 246,142 women in the UK Biobank
dc.contributor.authorHo, Peh Joo
dc.contributor.authorLim, Elaine H
dc.contributor.authorHartman, Mikael
dc.contributor.authorWong, Fuh Yong
dc.contributor.authorLi, Jingmei
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-17T02:14:42Z
dc.date.available2023-11-17T02:14:42Z
dc.date.issued2023-10
dc.identifier.citationHo, Peh Joo, Lim, Elaine H, Hartman, Mikael, Wong, Fuh Yong, Li, Jingmei (2023-10). Breast cancer risk stratification using genetic and non-genetic risk assessment tools for 246,142 women in the UK Biobank. GENETICS IN MEDICINE 25 (10). ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gim.2023.100917
dc.identifier.issn1098-3600
dc.identifier.issn1530-0366
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/246024
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The benefit of using individual risk prediction tools to identify high-risk individuals for breast cancer (BC) screening is uncertain, despite the personalized approach of risk-based screening. Methods: We studied the overlap of predicted high-risk individuals among 246,142 women enrolled in the UK Biobank. Risk predictors assessed include the Gail model (Gail), BC family history (FH, binary), BC polygenic risk score (PRS), and presence of loss-of-function (LoF) variants in BC predisposition genes. Youden J-index was used to select optimal thresholds for defining high-risk. Results: In total, 147,399 were considered at high risk for developing BC within the next 2 years by at least 1 of the 4 risk prediction tools examined (Gail2-year > 0.5%: 47%, PRS2-yea r > 0.7%: 30%, FH: 6%, and LoF: 1%); 92,851 (38%) were flagged by only 1 risk predictor. The overlap between individuals flagged as high-risk because of genetic (PRS) and Gail model risk factors was 30%. The best-performing combinatorial model comprises a union of high-risk women identified by PRS, FH, and, LoF (AUC2-year [95% CI]: 62.2 [60.8 to 63.6]). Assigning individual weights to each risk prediction tool increased discriminatory ability. Conclusion: Risk-based BC screening may require a multipronged approach that includes PRS, predisposition genes, FH, and other recognized risk factors.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
dc.sourceElements
dc.subjectScience & Technology
dc.subjectLife Sciences & Biomedicine
dc.subjectGenetics & Heredity
dc.subjectBreast cancer
dc.subjectFamily history
dc.subjectLoss -of -function variants
dc.subjectPolygenic risk scores
dc.subjectScreening
dc.subjectPOLYGENIC RISK
dc.subjectSCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY
dc.subjectPREDICTION MODELS
dc.subjectFAMILY-HISTORY
dc.subjectOLDER WOMEN
dc.subjectVALIDATION
dc.subjectDENSITY
dc.subjectSUSCEPTIBILITY
dc.subjectPROBABILITIES
dc.subjectINDIVIDUALS
dc.typeArticle
dc.date.updated2023-11-17T01:48:00Z
dc.contributor.departmentMEDICINE
dc.contributor.departmentSURGERY
dc.contributor.departmentDUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL
dc.contributor.departmentSAW SWEE HOCK SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
dc.description.doi10.1016/j.gim.2023.100917
dc.description.sourcetitleGENETICS IN MEDICINE
dc.description.volume25
dc.description.issue10
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
Breast cancer risk stratification using genetic and non-genetic risk assessment tools for 246,142 women in the UK Biobank.pdfPublished version1.04 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.