Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Feasibility of risk assessment for breast cancer molecular subtypes.
McCarthy, Anne Marie; Ehsan, Sarah; Hughes, Kevin S; Lehman, Constance D; Conant, Emily F; Kontos, Despina; Armstrong, Katrina; Chen, Jinbo.
Afiliação
  • McCarthy AM; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Blockley Hall, Room 833, 423 Guardian Drive, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. annemcc@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
  • Ehsan S; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Blockley Hall, Room 833, 423 Guardian Drive, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
  • Hughes KS; Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
  • Lehman CD; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Conant EF; Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Kontos D; Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Armstrong K; Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Chen J; Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38916820
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Few breast cancer risk assessment models account for the risk profiles of different tumor subtypes. This study evaluated whether a subtype-specific approach improves discrimination.

METHODS:

Among 3389 women who had a screening mammogram and were later diagnosed with invasive breast cancer we performed multinomial logistic regression with tumor subtype as the outcome and known breast cancer risk factors as predictors. Tumor subtypes were defined by expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) based on immunohistochemistry. Discrimination was assessed with the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Absolute risk of each subtype was estimated by proportioning Gail absolute risk estimates by the predicted probabilities for each subtype. We then compared risk factor distributions for women in the highest deciles of risk for each subtype.

RESULTS:

There were 3,073 ER/PR+ HER2 - , 340 ER/PR +HER2 + , 126 ER/PR-ER2+, and 300 triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC). Discrimination differed by subtype; ER/PR-HER2+ (AUC 0.64, 95% CI 0.59, 0.69) and TNBC (AUC 0.64, 95% CI 0.61, 0.68) had better discrimination than ER/PR+HER2+ (AUC 0.61, 95% CI 0.58, 0.64). Compared to other subtypes, patients at high absolute risk of TNBC were younger, mostly Black, had no family history of breast cancer, and higher BMI. Those at high absolute risk of HER2+ cancers were younger and had lower BMI.

CONCLUSION:

Our study provides proof of concept that stratifying risk prediction for breast cancer subtypes may enable identification of patients with unique profiles conferring increased risk for tumor subtypes.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Breast Cancer Res Treat Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Breast Cancer Res Treat Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos