Advertisement

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 152, Issue 1, pp 193–197 | Cite as

Assessing absolute changes in breast cancer risk due to modifiable risk factors

  • Anne S. Quante
  • Julia Herz
  • Alice S. Whittemore
  • Christine Fischer
  • Konstantin Strauch
  • Mary Beth TerryEmail author
Brief Report

Abstract

Clinical risk assessment involves absolute risk measures, but information on modifying risk and preventing cancer is often communicated in relative terms. To illustrate the potential impact of risk factor modification in model-based risk assessment, we evaluated the performance of the IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool, with and without current body mass index (BMI), for predicting future breast cancer occurrence in a prospective cohort of 665 postmenopausal women. Overall, IBIS’s accuracy (overall agreement between observed and assigned risks) and discrimination (AUC concordance between assigned risks and outcomes) were similar with and without the BMI information. However, in women with BMI > 25 kg/m2, adding BMI information improved discrimination (AUC = 63.9 % and 61.4 % with and without BMI, P < 0.001). The model-assigned 10-year risk difference for a woman with high (27 kg/m2) versus low (21 kg/m2) BMI was only 0.3 % for a woman with neither affected first-degree relatives nor BRCA1 mutation, compared to 4.5 % for a mutation carrier with three such relatives. This contrast illustrates the value of using information on modifiable risk factors in risk assessment and in sharing information with patients of their absolute risks with and without modifiable risk factors.

Keywords

Breast cancer IBIS BMI Prediction model Risk evaluation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Grant UM1 CA164920 from the USA National Cancer Institute. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

The authors declare that they do not have a financial relationship with the organization that sponsored the research.

References

  1. 1.
    Bevers TB, Anderson BO, Bonaccio E, Buys S, Daly MB, Dempsey PJ, Farrar WB, Fleming I, Garber JE, Harris RE, Heerdt AS, Helvie M, Huff JG, Khakpour N, Khan SA, Krontiras H, Lyman G, Rafferty E, Shaw S, Smith ML, Tsangaris TN, Williams C, Yankeelov T, National Comprehensive Cancer N (2009) NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer screening and diagnosis. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 7(10):1060–1096Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Schairer C, Mulvihill JJ (1989) Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 81(24):1879–1886Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gail MH, Costantino JP, Pee D, Bondy M, Newman L, Selvan M, Anderson GL, Malone KE, Marchbanks PA, McCaskill-Stevens W, Norman SA, Simon MS, Spirtas R, Ursin G, Bernstein L (2007) Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women. J Natl Cancer Inst 99(23):1782–1792. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm223
  4. 4.
    Matsuno RK, Costantino JP, Ziegler RG, Anderson GL, Li H, Pee D, Gail MH (2011) Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in Asian and Pacific Islander American women. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(12):951–961. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr154
  5. 5.
    Meads C, Ahmed I, Riley RD (2012) A systematic review of breast cancer incidence risk prediction models with meta-analysis of their performance. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132(2):365–377. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1818-2
  6. 6.
    Quante AS, Whittemore AS, Shriver T, Strauch K, Terry MB (2012) Breast cancer risk assessment across the risk continuum: genetic and nongenetic risk factors contributing to differential model performance. Breast Cancer Res 14(6):R144. doi: 10.1186/bcr3352
  7. 7.
    Quante AS, Whittemore AS, Shriver T, Hopper JL, Strauch K, Terry MB (2015) Practical problems with clinical guidelines for breast cancer prevention based on remaining lifetime risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 107(7). doi: 10.1093/jnci/djv124
  8. 8.
    John EM, Hopper JL, Beck JC, Knight JA, Neuhausen SL, Senie RT, Ziogas A, Andrulis IL, Anton-Culver H, Boyd N, Buys SS, Daly MB, O'Malley FP, Santella RM, Southey MC, Venne VL, Venter DJ, West DW, Whittemore AS, Seminara D (2004) The Breast Cancer Family Registry: an infrastructure for cooperative multinational, interdisciplinary and translational studies of the genetic epidemiology of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 6(4):R375–R389Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J (2004) A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med 23(7):1111–1130. doi: 10.1002/sim.1668
  10. 10.
    van den Brandt PA, Spiegelman D, Yaun SS, Adami HO, Beeson L, Folsom AR, Fraser G, Goldbohm RA, Graham S, Kushi L, Marshall JR, Miller AB, Rohan T, Smith-Warner SA, Speizer FE, Willett WC, Wolk A, Hunter DJ (2000) Pooled analysis of prospective cohort studies on height, weight, and breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 152(6):514–527Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cheraghi Z, Poorolajal J, Hashem T, Esmailnasab N, Doosti Irani A (2012) Effect of body mass index on breast cancer during premenopausal and postmenopausal periods: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 7(12):e51446. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051446
  12. 12.
    Key TJ, Allen NE, Verkasalo PK, Banks E (2001) Energy balance and cancer: the role of sex hormones. Proc Nutr Soc 60(1):81–89Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Roddam A, Dorgan JF, Longcope C, Stanczyk FZ, Stephenson HE, Jr., Falk RT, Miller R, Schatzkin A, Allen DS, Fentiman IS, Wang DY, Dowsett M, Thomas HV, Hankinson SE, Toniolo P, Akhmedkhanov A, Koenig K, Shore RE, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Berrino F, Muti P, Micheli A, Krogh V, Sieri S, Pala V, Venturelli E, Secreto G, Barrett-Connor E, Laughlin GA, Kabuto M, Akiba S, Stevens RG, Neriishi K, Land CE, Cauley JA, Kuller LH, Cummings SR, Helzlsouer KJ, Alberg AJ, Bush TL, Comstock GW, Gordon GB, Miller SR (2003) Body mass index, serum sex hormones, and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst 95(16):1218–1226Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (2001) Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet 358(9291):1389–1399. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06524-2
  15. 15.
    Manders P, Pijpe A, Hooning MJ, Kluijt I, Vasen HF, Hoogerbrugge N, van Asperen CJ, Meijers-Heijboer H, Ausems MG, van Os TA, Gomez-Garcia EB, Brohet RM, van Leeuwen FE, Rookus MA (2011) Body weight and risk of breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 126(1):193–202. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-1120-8

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne S. Quante
    • 1
    • 2
  • Julia Herz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alice S. Whittemore
    • 3
  • Christine Fischer
    • 4
  • Konstantin Strauch
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mary Beth Terry
    • 5
    • 6
    Email author
  1. 1.Chair of Genetic Epidemiology, Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and EpidemiologyLudwig-Maximilians-UniversitätMunichGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Genetic EpidemiologyHelmholtz Zentrum München - German Research Center for Environmental HealthNeuherbergGermany
  3. 3.Department of Health Research and PolicyStanford University School of MedicineStanfordUnited States
  4. 4.Institute of Human GeneticsUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  5. 5.Department of Epidemiology, Joseph L. Mailman School of Public HealthColumbia UniversityNew YorkUnited States
  6. 6.Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia Medical CenterNew YorkUnited States

Personalised recommendations