Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2012

01-05-2012 | Epidemiology

Assessing the added value of breast tumor markers in genetic risk prediction model BRCAPRO

Authors: Swati Biswas, Neelam Tankhiwale, Amanda Blackford, Angelica M. Gutierrez Barrera, Kaylene Ready, Karen Lu, Christopher I. Amos, Giovanni Parmigiani, Banu Arun

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

The BRCAPRO model estimates carrier probabilities for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, and was recently enhanced to use estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status of breast cancer. No independent assessment of the added value of these markers exists. Moreover, earlier versions of BRCAPRO did not use human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (Her-2/neu) status of breast cancer. Here, we incorporate Her-2/neu in BRCAPRO and validate all the markers. We trained the enhanced model on 406 germline tested individuals, and validated on a separate clinical cohort of 796 individuals for whom test results and family history are available. For model-building, we estimated joint probabilities of ER, PR, and Her-2/neu status for carriers and non-carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. For validation, we obtained BRCAPRO predictions with and without markers. We calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and correct reclassification rates. The AUC for predicting BRCA1 status among individuals who are carriers of at least one mutation improved when ER and PR were used. The AUC for predicting the presence of either mutation improved when Her-2/neu was added. Use of markers also produced highly significant correct reclassification improvements in both cases. Breast tumor markers are useful for prediction of BRCA1/2 mutation status. ER and PR improve discrimination between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers while Her-2/neu helps discriminate between carriers and non-carriers, particularly among women who are ER positive and Her-2/neu negative. These results support the use of the enhanced version of BRCAPRO in clinical settings.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S 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 72:1117–1130PubMedCrossRef Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S 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 72:1117–1130PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB (2003) Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science 302:643–646PubMedCrossRef King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB (2003) Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science 302:643–646PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chen S, Wang W, Broman KW et al (2004) BayesMendel: an R environment for Mendelian risk prediction. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol 3:21 Chen S, Wang W, Broman KW et al (2004) BayesMendel: an R environment for Mendelian risk prediction. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol 3:21
4.
go back to reference Parmigiani G, Berry D, Aguilar O (1998) Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet 62:145–158PubMedCrossRef Parmigiani G, Berry D, Aguilar O (1998) Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet 62:145–158PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference James PA, Doherty R, Harris M et al (2006) Optimal selection of individuals for BRCA mutation testing: a comparison of available methods. J Clin Oncol 24:707–715PubMedCrossRef James PA, Doherty R, Harris M et al (2006) Optimal selection of individuals for BRCA mutation testing: a comparison of available methods. J Clin Oncol 24:707–715PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Parmigiani G, Chen S, Iversen ES et al (2007) Validity of models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Ann Intern Med 147:441–450PubMed Parmigiani G, Chen S, Iversen ES et al (2007) Validity of models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Ann Intern Med 147:441–450PubMed
7.
go back to reference Barcenas CH, Hosain GM, Arun B et al (2006) Assessing BRCA carrier probabilities in extended families. J Clin Oncol 24:354–360PubMedCrossRef Barcenas CH, Hosain GM, Arun B et al (2006) Assessing BRCA carrier probabilities in extended families. J Clin Oncol 24:354–360PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Marroni F, Aretini P, D’Andrea E et al (2004) Evaluation of widely used models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Med Genet 41:278–285PubMedCrossRef Marroni F, Aretini P, D’Andrea E et al (2004) Evaluation of widely used models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Med Genet 41:278–285PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lindor NM, Lindor RA, Apicella C et al (2007) Predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: comparison of LAMBDA, BRCAPRO, Myriad II, and modified Couch models. Fam Cancer 6:473–482PubMedCrossRef Lindor NM, Lindor RA, Apicella C et al (2007) Predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: comparison of LAMBDA, BRCAPRO, Myriad II, and modified Couch models. Fam Cancer 6:473–482PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Euhus DM, Smith KC, Robinson L et al (2002) Pretest prediction of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by risk counselors and the computer model BRCAPRO. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:844–851PubMedCrossRef Euhus DM, Smith KC, Robinson L et al (2002) Pretest prediction of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by risk counselors and the computer model BRCAPRO. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:844–851PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kang HH, Williams R, Leary J et al (2006) Evaluation of models to predict BRCA germline mutations. Br J Cancer 95:914–920PubMedCrossRef Kang HH, Williams R, Leary J et al (2006) Evaluation of models to predict BRCA germline mutations. Br J Cancer 95:914–920PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Tai YC, Chen S, Parmigiani G et al (2008) Incorporating tumor immunohistochemical markers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carrier prediction. Breast Cancer Res 10:401PubMedCrossRef Tai YC, Chen S, Parmigiani G et al (2008) Incorporating tumor immunohistochemical markers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carrier prediction. Breast Cancer Res 10:401PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Katki HA, Blackford A, Chen S et al (2008) Multiple diseases in carrier probability estimation: accounting for surviving all cancers other than breast and ovary in BRCAPRO. Stat Med 27:4532–4548PubMedCrossRef Katki HA, Blackford A, Chen S et al (2008) Multiple diseases in carrier probability estimation: accounting for surviving all cancers other than breast and ovary in BRCAPRO. Stat Med 27:4532–4548PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Katki HA (2007) Incorporating medical interventions into Mendelian mutation prediction models. BMC Med Genet 8:13PubMedCrossRef Katki HA (2007) Incorporating medical interventions into Mendelian mutation prediction models. BMC Med Genet 8:13PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Chen S, Blackford AL, Parmigiani G (2009) Tailoring BRCAPRO to Asian-Americans. J Clin Oncol 27:642–643PubMedCrossRef Chen S, Blackford AL, Parmigiani G (2009) Tailoring BRCAPRO to Asian-Americans. J Clin Oncol 27:642–643PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Lakhani SR, Van De Vijver MJ, Jacquemier J et al (2002) The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Clin Oncol 20:2310–2318PubMedCrossRef Lakhani SR, Van De Vijver MJ, Jacquemier J et al (2002) The pathology of familial breast cancer: predictive value of immunohistochemical markers estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and p53 in patients with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Clin Oncol 20:2310–2318PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Lakhani SR, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L et al (2005) Prediction of BRCA1 status in patients with breast cancer using estrogen receptor and basal phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 11:5175–5180PubMedCrossRef Lakhani SR, Reis-Filho JS, Fulford L et al (2005) Prediction of BRCA1 status in patients with breast cancer using estrogen receptor and basal phenotype. Clin Cancer Res 11:5175–5180PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Atchley DP, Albarracin CT, Lopez A et al (2008) Clinical and pathologic characteristics of patients with BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:4282–4288PubMedCrossRef Atchley DP, Albarracin CT, Lopez A et al (2008) Clinical and pathologic characteristics of patients with BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:4282–4288PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Parmigiani G (2002) Modeling in medical decision making. Wiley, Chichester Parmigiani G (2002) Modeling in medical decision making. Wiley, Chichester
20.
21.
go back to reference Efron B, Tibshirani R (1994) An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman and Hall/CRC Monographs Efron B, Tibshirani R (1994) An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman and Hall/CRC Monographs
22.
go back to reference Cook NR, Buring JE, Ridker PM (2006) The effect of including C-reactive protein in cardiovascular risk prediction models for women. Ann Intern Med 145:21–29PubMed Cook NR, Buring JE, Ridker PM (2006) The effect of including C-reactive protein in cardiovascular risk prediction models for women. Ann Intern Med 145:21–29PubMed
23.
go back to reference Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, D’Agostino RB (2008) Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med 27:157–172PubMedCrossRef Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, D’Agostino RB (2008) Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med 27:157–172PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, Steyerberg EW (2011) Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers. Stat Med 30:11–21PubMedCrossRef Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, Steyerberg EW (2011) Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers. Stat Med 30:11–21PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Mavaddat N, Rebbeck TR, Lakhani SR et al (2010) Incorporating tumour pathology information into breast cancer risk prediction algorithms. Breast Cancer Res 12:R28PubMedCrossRef Mavaddat N, Rebbeck TR, Lakhani SR et al (2010) Incorporating tumour pathology information into breast cancer risk prediction algorithms. Breast Cancer Res 12:R28PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Assessing the added value of breast tumor markers in genetic risk prediction model BRCAPRO
Authors
Swati Biswas
Neelam Tankhiwale
Amanda Blackford
Angelica M. Gutierrez Barrera
Kaylene Ready
Karen Lu
Christopher I. Amos
Giovanni Parmigiani
Banu Arun
Publication date
01-05-2012
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-1958-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2012 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