Suppr超能文献

基于法裔加拿大人群队列的乳腺癌风险评估工具验证

Validation of breast cancer risk assessment tools on a French-Canadian population-based cohort.

作者信息

Jantzen Rodolphe, Payette Yves, de Malliard Thibault, Labbé Catherine, Noisel Nolwenn, Broët Philippe

机构信息

CARTaGENE, Research Center, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2021 Apr 12;11(4):e045078. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045078.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the accuracy of the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT), International Breast Cancer Intervention Study risk evaluation tool (IBIS), Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) and combined scores (BCRAT+PRS and IBIS +PRS) to predict the occurrence of invasive breast cancers at 5 years in a French-Canadian population.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

SETTING

We used the population-based cohort CARTaGENE, composed of 43 037 Quebec residents aged between 40 and 69 years and broadly representative of the population recorded on the Quebec administrative health insurance registries.

PARTICIPANTS

10 200 women recruited in 2009-2010 were included for validating BCRAT and IBIS and 4555 with genetic information for validating the PRS and combined scores.

OUTCOME MEASURES

We computed the absolute risks of breast cancer at 5 years using BCRAT, IBIS, four published PRS and combined models. We reported the overall calibration performance, goodness-of-fit test and discriminatory accuracy.

RESULTS

131 (1.28%) women developed a breast cancer at 5 years for validating BCRAT and IBIS and 58 (1.27%) for validating PRS and combined scores. Median follow-up was 5 years. BCRAT and IBIS had an overall expected-to-observed ratio of 1.01 (0.85-1.19) and 1.02 (0.86-1.21) but with significant differences when partitioning by risk groups (p<0.05). IBIS' c-index was significantly higher than BCRAT (63.42 (59.35-67.49) vs 58.63 (54.05-63.21), p=0.013). PRS scores had a global calibration around 0.82, with a CI including one, and non-significant goodness-of-fit tests. PRS' c-indexes were non-significantly higher than BCRAT and IBIS, the highest being 64.43 (58.23-70.63). Combined models did not improve the results.

CONCLUSIONS

In this French-Canadian population-based cohort, BCRAT and IBIS have good mean calibration that could be improved for risk subgroups, and modest discriminatory accuracy. Despite this modest discriminatory power, these tools can be of interest for primary care physicians for delivering a personalised message to their high-risk patients, regarding screening and lifestyle counselling.

摘要

目的

评估乳腺癌风险评估工具(BCRAT)、国际乳腺癌干预研究风险评估工具(IBIS)、多基因风险评分(PRS)以及综合评分(BCRAT + PRS和IBIS + PRS)在预测法裔加拿大人群5年内浸润性乳腺癌发生情况方面的准确性。

设计

基于人群的队列研究。

背景

我们使用了基于人群的CARTaGENE队列,该队列由43037名年龄在40至69岁之间的魁北克居民组成,广泛代表了魁北克行政医疗保险登记处记录的人群。

参与者

2009 - 2010年招募的10200名女性被纳入以验证BCRAT和IBIS,4555名有基因信息的女性被纳入以验证PRS和综合评分。

观察指标

我们使用BCRAT、IBIS、四个已发表的PRS以及综合模型计算了5年内患乳腺癌的绝对风险。我们报告了总体校准性能、拟合优度检验和鉴别准确性。

结果

在用于验证BCRAT和IBIS的人群中,131名(1.28%)女性在5年内患了乳腺癌,在用于验证PRS和综合评分的人群中,58名(1.27%)女性患了乳腺癌。中位随访时间为5年。BCRAT和IBIS的总体预期与观察比率分别为1.01(0.85 - 1.19)和1.02(0.86 - 1.21),但按风险组划分时有显著差异(p<0.05)。IBIS的c指数显著高于BCRAT(63.42(59.35 - 67.49)对58.63(54.05 - 63.21),p = 0.013)。PRS评分的总体校准约为0.82,置信区间包含1,拟合优度检验无显著性差异。PRS的c指数略高于BCRAT和IBIS,但无显著性差异,最高为64.43(58.23 - 70.63)。综合模型并未改善结果。

结论

在这个基于法裔加拿大人群的队列中,BCRAT和IBIS具有良好的平均校准,但对于风险亚组可以改进,且鉴别准确性一般。尽管鉴别能力一般,但这些工具对于初级保健医生向其高危患者提供关于筛查和生活方式咨询的个性化信息可能是有用的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d5a0/8047995/3f459f8812dd/bmjopen-2020-045078f01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验