Correction: BOADICEA: a comprehensive breast cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and nongenetic risk factors.

This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article. The authors regret this error.

BOADICEA: a comprehensive breast cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and nongenetic risk factors.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer (BC) risk prediction allows systematic identification of individuals at highest and lowest risk. We extend the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) risk model to incorporate the effects of polygenic risk scores (PRS) and other risk factors (RFs). METHODS: BOADICEA incorporates the effects of truncating variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM; a PRS based on 313 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) explaining 20% of BC polygenic variance; a residual polygenic component accounting for other genetic/familial effects; known lifestyle/hormonal/reproductive RFs; and mammographic density, while allowing for missing information. RESULTS: Among all factors considered, the predicted UK BC risk distribution is widest for the PRS, followed by mammographic density. The highest BC risk stratification is achieved when all genetic and lifestyle/hormonal/reproductive/anthropomorphic factors are considered jointly. With all factors, the predicted lifetime risks for women in the UK population vary from 2.8% for the 1st percentile to 30.6% for the 99th percentile, with 14.7% of women predicted to have a lifetime risk of ≥17-<30% (moderate risk according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] guidelines) and 1.1% a lifetime risk of ≥30% (high risk). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive model should enable high levels of BC risk stratification in the general population and women with family history, and facilitate individualized, informed decision-making on prevention therapies and screening.

Smoking status, usual adult occupation, and risk of recurrent urothelial bladder carcinoma: data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Project.

PURPOSE: Tobacco smoking and occupational exposures are the leading risk factors for developing urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC), yet little is known about the contribution of these two factors to risk of UBC recurrence. We evaluated whether smoking status and usual adult occupation are associated with time to UBC recurrence for 406 patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer submitted to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project. METHODS: Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard methods were used to assess the association between smoking status, employment in a high-risk occupation for bladder cancer, occupational diesel exhaust exposure, and 2010 Standard Occupational Classification group and time to UBC recurrence. RESULTS: Data on time to recurrence were available for 358 patients over a median follow-up time of 15 months. Of these, 133 (37.2%) experienced a recurrence. Current smokers who smoked for more than 40 pack-years had an increased risk of recurrence compared to never smokers (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1, 4.1). Additionally, employment in a high-risk occupation was associated with a shorter time to recurrence (log-rank p = 0.005). We found an increased risk of recurrence for those employed in occupations with probable diesel exhaust exposure (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1, 3.0) and for those employed in production occupations (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1, 3.6). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest smoking status impacts risk of UBC recurrence, although several previous studies provided equivocal evidence regarding this association. In addition to the known causal relationship between occupational exposure and bladder cancer risk, our study suggests that occupation may also be related to increased risk of recurrence.

Combined Associations of a Polygenic Risk Score and Classical Risk Factors With Breast Cancer Risk.

We evaluated the joint associations between a new 313-variant PRS (PRS313) and questionnaire-based breast cancer risk factors for women of European ancestry, using 72 284 cases and 80 354 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Interactions were evaluated using standard logistic regression and a newly developed case-only method for breast cancer risk overall and by estrogen receptor status. After accounting for multiple testing, we did not find evidence that per-standard deviation PRS313 odds ratio differed across strata defined by individual risk factors. Goodness-of-fit tests did not reject the assumption of a multiplicative model between PRS313 and each risk factor. Variation in projected absolute lifetime risk of breast cancer associated with classical risk factors was greater for women with higher genetic risk (PRS313 and family history) and, on average, 17.5% higher in the highest vs lowest deciles of genetic risk. These findings have implications for risk prevention for women at increased risk of breast cancer.

Comparative Validation of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models and Projections for Future Risk Stratification.

BACKGROUND: External validation of risk models is critical for risk-stratified breast cancer prevention. We used the Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimation (iCARE) as a flexible tool for risk model development and comparative model validation and to make projections for population risk stratification. METHODS: Performance of two recently developed models, one based on the Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium analysis (iCARE-BPC3) and another based on a literature review (iCARE-Lit), were compared with two established models (Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool and International Breast Cancer Intervention Study Model) based on classical risk factors in a UK-based cohort of 64 874 white non-Hispanic women (863 patients) age 35-74 years. Risk projections in a target population of US white non-Hispanic women age 50-70 years assessed potential improvements in risk stratification by adding mammographic breast density (MD) and polygenic risk score (PRS). RESULTS: The best calibrated models were iCARE-Lit (expected to observed number of cases [E/O] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 1.11) for women younger than 50 years, and iCARE-BPC3 (E/O = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.93 to 1.09) for women 50 years or older. Risk projections using iCARE-BPC3 indicated classical risk factors can identify approximately 500 000 women at moderate to high risk (>3% 5-year risk) in the target population. Addition of MD and a 313-variant PRS is expected to increase this number to approximately 3.5 million women, and among them, approximately 153 000 are expected to develop invasive breast cancer within 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: iCARE models based on classical risk factors perform similarly to or better than BCRAT or IBIS in white non-Hispanic women. Addition of MD and PRS can lead to substantial improvements in risk stratification. However, these integrated models require independent prospective validation before broad clinical applications.

Joint associations of a polygenic risk score and environmental risk factors for breast cancer in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium.

Background: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast cancer can be used to stratify the population into groups at substantially different levels of risk. Combining PRS and environmental risk factors will improve risk prediction; however, integrating PRS into risk prediction models requires evaluation of their joint association with known environmental risk factors. Methods: Analyses were based on data from 20 studies; datasets analysed ranged from 3453 to 23 104 invasive breast cancer cases and similar numbers of controls, depending on the analysed environmental risk factor. We evaluated joint associations of a 77-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) PRS with reproductive history, alcohol consumption, menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), height and body mass index (BMI). We tested the null hypothesis of multiplicative joint associations for PRS and each of the environmental factors, and performed global and tail-based goodness-of-fit tests in logistic regression models. The outcomes were breast cancer overall and by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Results: The strongest evidence for a non-multiplicative joint associations with the 77-SNP PRS was for alcohol consumption (P-interaction = 0.009), adult height (P-interaction = 0.025) and current use of combined MHT (P-interaction = 0.038) in ER-positive disease. Risk associations for these factors by percentiles of PRS did not follow a clear dose-response. In addition, global and tail-based goodness of fit tests showed little evidence for departures from a multiplicative risk model, with alcohol consumption showing the strongest evidence for ER-positive disease (P = 0.013 for global and 0.18 for tail-based tests). Conclusions: The combined effects of the 77-SNP PRS and environmental risk factors for breast cancer are generally well described by a multiplicative model. Larger studies are required to confirm possible departures from the multiplicative model for individual risk factors, and assess models specific for ER-negative disease.