Kang H H, Williams R, Leary J, Ringland C, Kirk J, Ward R
Department of Medical Oncology, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, and Familial Cancer Service Westmead Institute for Cancer Research at Westmead Millenium Institute, University of Sydney, Australia.
Br J Cancer. 2006 Oct 9;95(7):914-20. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603358.
The selection of candidates for BRCA germline mutation testing is an important clinical issue yet it remains a significant challenge. A number of risk prediction models have been developed to assist in pretest counselling. We have evaluated the performance and the inter-rater reliability of four of these models (BRCAPRO, Manchester, Penn and the Myriad-Frank). The four risk assessment models were applied to 380 pedigrees of families who had undergone BRCA1/2 mutation analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, likelihood ratios and area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve were calculated for each model. Using a greater than 10% probability threshold, the likelihood that a BRCA test result was positive in a mutation carrier compared to the likelihood that the same result would be expected in an individual without a BRCA mutation was 2.10 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.66-2.67) for Penn, 1.74 (95% CI 1.48-2.04) for Myriad, 1.35 (95% CI 1.19-1.53) for Manchester and 1.68 (95% CI 1.39-2.03) for BRCAPRO. Application of these models, therefore, did not rule in BRCA mutation carrier status. Similar trends were observed for separate BRCA1/2 performance measures except BRCA2 assessment in the Penn model where the positive likelihood ratio was 5.93. The area under the ROC curve for each model was close to 0.75. In conclusion, the four models had very little impact on the pre-test probability of disease; there were significant clinical barriers to using some models and risk estimates varied between experts. Use of models for predicting BRCA mutation status is not currently justified for populations such as that evaluated in the current study.
选择进行BRCA种系突变检测的候选人是一个重要的临床问题,但仍然是一项重大挑战。已经开发了许多风险预测模型来辅助检测前咨询。我们评估了其中四个模型(BRCAPRO、曼彻斯特模型、宾夕法尼亚模型和Myriad-Frank模型)的性能和评分者间信度。将这四个风险评估模型应用于380个已进行BRCA1/2突变分析的家族系谱。计算了每个模型的灵敏度、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值、似然比以及受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线下面积。使用大于10%的概率阈值,宾夕法尼亚模型中,突变携带者BRCA检测结果为阳性的可能性与无BRCA突变个体预期出现相同结果的可能性之比为2.10(95%置信区间(CI)1.66 - 2.67),Myriad模型为1.74(95% CI 1.48 - 2.04),曼彻斯特模型为1.35(95% CI 1.19 - 1.53),BRCAPRO模型为1.68(95% CI 1.39 - 2.03)。因此,应用这些模型并不能确定BRCA突变携带者状态。除了宾夕法尼亚模型中BRCA2评估的阳性似然比为5.93外,在BRCA1/2单独的性能指标中也观察到了类似趋势。每个模型的ROC曲线下面积接近0.75。总之,这四个模型对疾病检测前概率的影响很小;使用某些模型存在重大临床障碍,并且专家之间的风险估计存在差异。对于当前研究中评估的人群,目前使用模型预测BRCA突变状态并不合理。