Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2013

Open Access 01-11-2013 | Epidemiology

Validation of Rosner–Colditz breast cancer incidence model using an independent data set, the California Teachers Study

Authors: B. A. Rosner, G. A. Colditz, S. E. Hankinson, J. Sullivan-Halley, J. V. Lacey Jr., L. Bernstein

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

To validate an established breast cancer incidence model in an independent prospective data set. After aligning time periods for follow-up, we restricted populations to comparable age ranges (47–74 years), and followed them for incident invasive breast cancer (follow-up 1994–2008, Nurses’ Health Study [NHS]; and 1995–2009, California Teachers Study [CTS]). We identified 2026 cases during 540,617 person years of follow-up in NHS, and 1,400 cases during 288,111 person years in CTS. We fit the Rosner–Colditz log-incidence model and the Gail model using baseline data. We imputed future use of hormones based on type and prior duration of use and other covariates. We assessed performance using area under the curve (AUC) and calibration methods. Participants in the CTS had fewer children, were leaner, consumed more alcohol, and were more frequent users of postmenopausal hormones. Incidence rate ratios for breast cancer showed significantly higher breast cancer in the CTS (IRR = 1.32, 95 % CI 1.24–1.42). Parameters for the log-incidence model were comparable across the two cohorts. Overall, the NHS model performed equally well when applied in the CTS. In the NHS the AUC was 0.60 (s.e. 0.006) and applying the NHS betas to the CTS the performance in the independent data set (validation) was 0.586 (s.e. 0.009). The Gail model gave values of 0.547 (s.e. 0.008), a significant 4 % lower, p < 0.0001. For women 47–69 the AUC values for the log-incidence model are 0.608 in NHS and 0.609 in CTS; and for Gail are 0.569 and 0.572. In both cohorts, performance of both models dropped off in older women 70–87, and later in follow-up (6–12 years). Calibration showed good estimation against SEER with a non-significant 4 % underestimate of overall breast cancer incidence when applying the model in the CTS population (p = 0.098). The Rosner–Colditz model performs consistently well when applied in an independent data set. Performance is stronger predicting incidence among women 47–69 and over a 5-year time interval. AUC values exceed those for Gail by 3–5 % based on AUC when both are applied to the independent validation data set. Models may be further improved with addition of breast density or other markers of risk beyond the current model.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rosner B, Colditz GA (1996) Nurses’ health study: log-incidence mathematical model of breast cancer incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst 88(6):359–364PubMedCrossRef Rosner B, Colditz GA (1996) Nurses’ health study: log-incidence mathematical model of breast cancer incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst 88(6):359–364PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Colditz G, Rosner B (2000) Cumulative risk of breast cancer to age 70 years according to risk factor status: data from the Nurses’ Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 152(10):950–964PubMedCrossRef Colditz G, Rosner B (2000) Cumulative risk of breast cancer to age 70 years according to risk factor status: data from the Nurses’ Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 152(10):950–964PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Colditz G, Rosner B, Chen WY, Holmes M, Hankinson SE (2004) Risk factors for breast cancer: according to estrogen and progesterone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:218–228PubMedCrossRef Colditz G, Rosner B, Chen WY, Holmes M, Hankinson SE (2004) Risk factors for breast cancer: according to estrogen and progesterone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:218–228PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Trichopoulos D, Hsieh CC, MacMahon B et al (1983) Age at any birth and breast cancer risk. Int J Cancer 31(6):701–704PubMedCrossRef Trichopoulos D, Hsieh CC, MacMahon B et al (1983) Age at any birth and breast cancer risk. Int J Cancer 31(6):701–704PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Rosner B, Colditz GA, Willett WC (1994) Reproductive risk factors in a prospective study of breast cancer: the Nurses’ Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 139(8):819–835PubMed Rosner B, Colditz GA, Willett WC (1994) Reproductive risk factors in a prospective study of breast cancer: the Nurses’ Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 139(8):819–835PubMed
6.
go back to reference Lambe M, Hsieh C-c, Trichopoulos D, Ekbom A, Pavia A, Adami H-O (1994) Transient increase in risk of breast cancer after giving birth. N Engl J Med 331:5–9PubMedCrossRef Lambe M, Hsieh C-c, Trichopoulos D, Ekbom A, Pavia A, Adami H-O (1994) Transient increase in risk of breast cancer after giving birth. N Engl J Med 331:5–9PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Colditz GA, Rosner BA (2006) What can be learnt from models of incidence rates? Breast Cancer Res 8(3):208PubMedCrossRef Colditz GA, Rosner BA (2006) What can be learnt from models of incidence rates? Breast Cancer Res 8(3):208PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Moons KG, Kengne AP, Grobbee DE et al (2012) Risk prediction models: II. External validation, model updating, and impact assessment. Heart 98(9):691–698PubMedCrossRef Moons KG, Kengne AP, Grobbee DE et al (2012) Risk prediction models: II. External validation, model updating, and impact assessment. Heart 98(9):691–698PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Moons KG, Kengne AP, Woodward M et al (2012) Risk prediction models: I. Development, internal validation, and assessing the incremental value of a new (bio)marker. Heart 98(9):683–690PubMedCrossRef Moons KG, Kengne AP, Woodward M et al (2012) Risk prediction models: I. Development, internal validation, and assessing the incremental value of a new (bio)marker. Heart 98(9):683–690PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference 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):365–377PubMedCrossRef 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):365–377PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP et al (1989) Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:1879–1886PubMedCrossRef Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP et al (1989) Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:1879–1886PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Rosner B, Colditz GA, Iglehart JD, Hankinson SE (2008) Risk prediction models with incomplete data with application to prediction of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: prospective data from the Nurses’ Health Study. Breast Cancer Res 10(4):R55PubMedCrossRef Rosner B, Colditz GA, Iglehart JD, Hankinson SE (2008) Risk prediction models with incomplete data with application to prediction of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: prospective data from the Nurses’ Health Study. Breast Cancer Res 10(4):R55PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Lilienfeld AM (1956) The relationship of cancer of the female breast to artificial menopause and marital status. Cancer 9:927–934PubMedCrossRef Lilienfeld AM (1956) The relationship of cancer of the female breast to artificial menopause and marital status. Cancer 9:927–934PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Trichopoulos D, MacMahon B, Cole P (1972) Menopause and breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 48(3):605–613PubMed Trichopoulos D, MacMahon B, Cole P (1972) Menopause and breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 48(3):605–613PubMed
15.
go back to reference International Agency for Research on Cancer (2008) Monograph on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to humans: combined estrogen/progestogen contraceptives and combined estrogen/progestogen menopausal therapy. Combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives and combined estrogen-progestogen menopausal therapy, vol 91. IARC Press, Lyon. International Agency for Research on Cancer (2008) Monograph on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to humans: combined estrogen/progestogen contraceptives and combined estrogen/progestogen menopausal therapy. Combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives and combined estrogen-progestogen menopausal therapy, vol 91. IARC Press, Lyon.
16.
go back to reference International Agency for Research on Cancer (2002) Weight control and physical activity, vol 6. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon International Agency for Research on Cancer (2002) Weight control and physical activity, vol 6. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon
17.
go back to reference IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans (2007) Alcohol consumption and ethyl carbamate. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon (Distributed by WHO Press, 2010) IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans (2007) Alcohol consumption and ethyl carbamate. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon (Distributed by WHO Press, 2010)
18.
go back to reference Colditz GA, Hankinson SE, Hunter DJ et al (1995) The use of estrogens and progestins and the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 332:1589–1593PubMedCrossRef Colditz GA, Hankinson SE, Hunter DJ et al (1995) The use of estrogens and progestins and the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 332:1589–1593PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Bernstein L, Allen M, Anton-Culver H et al (2002) High breast cancer incidence rates among California teachers: results from the California Teachers Study (United States). Cancer Causes Control 13:625–635PubMedCrossRef Bernstein L, Allen M, Anton-Culver H et al (2002) High breast cancer incidence rates among California teachers: results from the California Teachers Study (United States). Cancer Causes Control 13:625–635PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Rosner B, Glynn RJ (2009) Power and sample size estimation for the Wilcoxon rank sum test with application to comparisons of C statistics from alternative prediction models. Biometrics 65(1):188–197PubMedCrossRef Rosner B, Glynn RJ (2009) Power and sample size estimation for the Wilcoxon rank sum test with application to comparisons of C statistics from alternative prediction models. Biometrics 65(1):188–197PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Boyle P, Mezzetti M, La Vecchia C, Franceschi S, Decarli A, Robertson C (2004) Contribution of three components to individual cancer risk predicting breast cancer risk in Italy. Eur J Cancer Prev 13(3):183–191PubMedCrossRef Boyle P, Mezzetti M, La Vecchia C, Franceschi S, Decarli A, Robertson C (2004) Contribution of three components to individual cancer risk predicting breast cancer risk in Italy. Eur J Cancer Prev 13(3):183–191PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J (2004) A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med 23(7):1111–1130PubMedCrossRef Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J (2004) A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med 23(7):1111–1130PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Amir E, Evans DG, Shenton A et al (2003) Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme. J Med Genet 40(11):807–814PubMedCrossRef Amir E, Evans DG, Shenton A et al (2003) Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme. J Med Genet 40(11):807–814PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference van Dieren S, Beulens JW, Kengne AP et al (2012) Prediction models for the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Heart 98(5):360–369PubMedCrossRef van Dieren S, Beulens JW, Kengne AP et al (2012) Prediction models for the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Heart 98(5):360–369PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Rosner B, Colditz GA (2011) Age at menopause: imputing age at menopause for women with a hysterectomy with application to risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol 21(6):450–460PubMedCrossRef Rosner B, Colditz GA (2011) Age at menopause: imputing age at menopause for women with a hysterectomy with application to risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol 21(6):450–460PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Seddon JM, Reynolds R, Yu Y, Daly MJ, Rosner B (2011) Risk models for progression to advanced age-related macular degeneration using demographic, environmental, genetic, and ocular factors. Ophthalmology 118(11):2203–2211PubMedCrossRef Seddon JM, Reynolds R, Yu Y, Daly MJ, Rosner B (2011) Risk models for progression to advanced age-related macular degeneration using demographic, environmental, genetic, and ocular factors. Ophthalmology 118(11):2203–2211PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Evans DG, Warwick J, Astley SM et al (2012) Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res 5(7):943–951CrossRef Evans DG, Warwick J, Astley SM et al (2012) Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res 5(7):943–951CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K (2008) Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 148(5):337–347PubMedCrossRef Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K (2008) Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 148(5):337–347PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Validation of Rosner–Colditz breast cancer incidence model using an independent data set, the California Teachers Study
Authors
B. A. Rosner
G. A. Colditz
S. E. Hankinson
J. Sullivan-Halley
J. V. Lacey Jr.
L. Bernstein
Publication date
01-11-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2013
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2719-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2013 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine