Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A two-stage approach to genetic risk assessment in primary care

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Genetic risk prediction models such as BRCAPRO are used routinely in genetic counseling for identification of potential BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. They require extensive information on the counselee and her family history, and thus are not practical for primary care. To address this gap, we develop and test a two-stage approach to genetic risk assessment by balancing the tradeoff between the amount of information used and accuracy achieved. The first stage is intended for primary care wherein limited information is collected and analyzed using a simplified version of BRCAPRO. If the assessed risk is sufficiently high, more extensive information is collected and the full BRCAPRO is used (stage two: intended for genetic counseling). We consider three first-stage tools: BRCAPROLYTE, BRCAPROLYTE-Plus, and BRCAPROLYTE-Simple. We evaluate the two-stage approach on independent clinical data on probands with family history of breast and ovarian cancers, and BRCA genetic test results. These include population-based data on 1344 probands from Newton-Wellesley Hospital and mostly high-risk family data on 2713 probands from Cancer Genetics Network and MD Anderson Cancer Center. We use discrimination and calibration measures, appropriately modified to evaluate the overall performance of a two-stage approach. We find that the proposed two-stage approach has very limited loss of discrimination and comparable calibration as BRCAPRO. It identifies a similar number of carriers without requiring a full family history evaluation on all probands. We conclude that the two-stage approach allows for practical large-scale genetic risk assessment in primary care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S, Risch HA, Eyfjord JE, Hopper JL et al (2003) Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case Series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. Am J Hum Genet 72:1117–1130

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB (2003) Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science 302:643–646

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Drohan B, Roche CA, Cusack JC (2012) Hughes KS (2012) Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and other hereditary syndromes: using technology to identify carriers. Ann Surg Oncol 19:1732–1737

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Drohan B, Ozanne EM, Hughes KS (2009) Electronic health records and the management of women at high risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Breast J 15(Suppl 1):46–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Parmigiani G, Berry D, Aguilar O (1998) Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer- susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet 62:145–158

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen S, Wang W, Broman KW, Katki HA, Parmigiani G (2004). BayesMendel: an R environment for Mendelian risk prediction. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol 3(1):1–19; Article 21

  7. CancerGene (2015) https://www4.utsouthwestern.edu/breasthealth/cagene/. Accessed 31 December 2015

  8. BayesMendel Web-based Risk Service (2015) http://bayesmendel.dfci.harvard.edu/risk/. Accessed 31 December 2015

  9. HughesRiskApps (2015) http://www.HughesRiskApps.com. Accessed 31 December 2015

  10. Tai YC, Chen S, Parmigiani G, Klein AP (2008) Incorporating tumor immunohistochemical markers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carrier prediction. Breast Cancer Res 10:401

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Katki HA, Blackford A, Chen S, Parmigiani G (2008) Multiple diseases in carrier probability estimation: accounting for surviving all cancers other than breast and ovary in BRCAPRO. Stat Med 27:4532–4548

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Katki HA (2007) Incorporating medical interventions into Mendelian mutation prediction models. BMC Med Genet 8:13

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen S, Blackford A, Parmigiani G (2009) Tailoring BRCAPRO to Asian-Americans. J Clin Oncol 27:642–643

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Biswas S, Tankhiwale N, Blackford A, Barrera AM, Ready K, Lu K et al (2012) Assessing the added value of breast tumor markers in genetic risk prediction model BRCAPRO. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133:347–355

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mazzola E, Blackford A, Parmigiani G, Biswas S (2015) Recent Enhancements to the genetic risk prediction model BRCAPRO. Cancer Inform 14(S2):147–157

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Biswas S, Atienza P, Chipman J, Hughes K, Gutierrez Barrera AM, Amos CI et al (2013) Simplifying clinical use of the genetic risk prediction model BRCAPRO. Breast Cancer Res Treat 139:571–579

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ozanne EM, Loberg A, Hughes S, Lawrence C, Drohan B, Semine A et al (2009) Identification and management of women at high risk for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer syndrome. Breast J 15:155–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Parmigiani G, Chen S, Iversen ES, Friebel TM, Finkelstein DM, Anton-Culver H et al (2007) Validity of models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Ann Intern Med 147:441–450

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. NCCN guidelines (2015) http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp#detection. Accessed 31 December 2015

  20. Gilpin CA, Carson N, Hunter AG (2000) A preliminary validation of a family history assessment form to select women at risk for breast or ovarian cancer for referral to a genetics center. Clin Genet 58:299–308

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. American Society of Clinical Oncology (1996) Statement of the American Society of Clinical Oncology: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 14:1730–1736

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chen S, Wang W, Lee S, Nafa K, Lee J, Romans K et al (2006) Prediction of germline mutations and cancer risk in the Lynch syndrome. J Am Med Assoc 296:1479–1487

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang W, Chen S, Brune KA, Hruban RH, Parmigiani G, Klein AP (2007) PancPRO: risk assessment for individuals with a family history of pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:1417–1422

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang W, Niendorf KB, Patel D, Blackford A, Marroni F, Sober AJ et al (2010) Estimating CDKN2A carrier probability and personalizing cancer risk assessments in hereditary melanoma using MelaPRO. Cancer Res 70:552–559

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the following Grants: 1R03CA173834-02 and 2P30CA006516-47 from the National Cancer Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Swati Biswas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Kevin Hughes is a founder of and has a financial interest in Hughes Risk Apps (HRA), LLC. Dr. Hughes’s interests were reviewed and are managed by Massachusetts General Hospital and Partners HealthCare in accordance with their conflict of interest policies. Kevin Hughes has received honoraria from Myriad Genetics Speaker’s Bureau and holds stock options in 5 AM solutions. GP is on the SAB of HRA and holds stock options in the company.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 175 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Biswas, S., Atienza, P., Chipman, J. et al. A two-stage approach to genetic risk assessment in primary care. Breast Cancer Res Treat 155, 375–383 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3686-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3686-2

Keywords

Navigation