Use of detailed family history data to improve risk prediction,with application to breast cancer screening

Autoři: Yue Jiang aff001;  Clarice R. Weinberg aff001;  Dale P. Sandler aff003;  Shanshan Zhao aff001
Působiště autorů: Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America aff001;  Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America aff002;  Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America aff003
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(12)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226407



As breast cancer represents a major morbidity and mortality burden in the U.S., with about one in eight women developing invasive breast cancer over her lifetime, accurate low-cost screening is an important public health issue. First-degree family history, often simplified as a dichotomous or three-level categorical variable (0/1/>1) based on number of affected relatives, is an important risk factor for many conditions. However, detailed family structure information such as the total number of first-degree relatives, and for each, their current or death age, and age at diagnosis are also important for risk prediction.


We develop a family history score under a Bayesian framework, based on first-degree family structure. We tested performance of the proposed score using data from a large prospective cohort study of women with a first-degree breast cancer family history. We used likelihood ratio tests to evaluate whether the proposed score added additional information to a Cox model with known breast cancer risk factors and the three-level family history variable. We also compared prediction performance through Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and goodness-of-fit testing.


Our proposed Bayesian family history score improved fit compared to the commonly used three-level family history score, both without and with adjustment for other risk factors (likelihood ratio tests p = 0.003 without adjustment for other risk factors, and p = 0.007 and 0.009 under adjustment with two candidate sets of risk factors). AUCs of ROC curves for the two models were similar, though in all cases were higher after addition of the BFHS.


Capturing detailed family history data through the proposed family history score can improve risk assessment and prediction. Such approaches could enable better-targeted personalized screening schedules and prevention strategies.

Klíčová slova:

Biopsy – Breast cancer – Cancer detection and diagnosis – Cancer risk factors – Cancer screening – Women's health


1. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, Herzig A, Michaelson JS, Shih YC, et al. Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015 Oct 20;314(15):1599–614 doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.12783 26501536

2. Welch HG, Prorok PC, O’Malley AJ, Kramer BS. Breast-Cancer Tumor Size, Overdiagnosis, and Mammography Screening Effectiveness. N Engl J Med, 2016 Oct 13;375(15): p. 1438–1447. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1600249 27732805

3. McPherson K, Steel CM, Dixon JM. ABC of breast diseases. Breast cancer-epidemiology, risk factors, and genetics. BMJ. 2000 Sep 9;321(7261):624–8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7261.624 10977847

4. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Schairer C, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989 Dec 20;81(24):1879–86. doi: 10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879 2593165

5. Lee AJ, Cunningham AP, Kuchenbaecker KB, Mavaddat N, Easton DE, Antoniou AC, et al. BOADICEA breast cancer risk prediction model: updates to cancer incidences, tumour pathology and web interface. Br J Cancer. 2014 Jan 21;110(2):535–45. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.730 24346285

6. Euhus DM, Smith KC, Robinson L, Stucky A, Olopade OI, Cummings S, et al. Pretest prediction of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by risk counselors and the computer model BRCAPRO. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Jun 5;94(11):844–51. doi: 10.1093/jnci/94.11.844 12048272

7. Maas P, Barrdahl M, Joshi AD, Auer PL, Gaudet MM, Milne RL, et al. Breast Cancer Risk From Modifiable and Nonmodifiable Risk Factors Among White Women in the United States. JAMA Oncol. 2016 Oct 1;2(10):1295–1302. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.1025 27228256

8. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet. 2001 Oct 27;358(9291):1389–99. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06524-2 11705483

9. Pharoah PD, Day NE, Duffy S, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Family history and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 1997 May 29;71(5):800–9. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19970529)71:5<800::aid-ijc18>;2-b 9180149

10. Bevier M, Sundquist K, Hemminki K. Risk of breast cancer in families of multiple affected women and men. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Apr;132(2):723–8. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1915-2 22179927

11. Weinberg CR, Shore DL, Umbach DM, Sandler DP. Using risk-based sampling to enrich cohorts for endpoints, genes, and exposures. Am J Epidemiol. 2007 Aug 15;166(4):447–455. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm097 17556763

12. Gail MH. Personalized estimates of breast cancer risk in clinical practice and public health. Stat Med. 2011 May 10;30(10):1090–104. doi: 10.1002/sim.4187 21337591

13. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, National Cancer Institute, SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975–2013. Tables 4.11: Age-Specific SEER Incidence Rates 2009–2013 by Race, Cancer of the Breast (Invasive) and 4.12: Cancer of the Female Breast (In Situ).

14. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Menarche, menopause, and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis, including 118,964 women with breast cancer from 117 epidemiological studies. Lancet Oncol. 2012 Nov;13(11):1141–51. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70425-4 23084519

15. Munsell MF, Sprague BL, Berry DA, Chisholm G, Trentham-Dietz A. Body mass index and breast cancer risk according to postmenopausal estrogen-progestin use and hormone receptor status. Epidemiol Rev. 2014;36:114–36. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxt010 24375928

16. Arias E, Heron M, Xu J. United States Life Tables, 2013. National Vital Statistics Reports. 2017 Apr 11;66(3):1–63. 28437241

17. Yang Q, Khoury MJ, Rodriguez C, Calle EE, Tatham LM, Flanders WD. Family history score as a predictor of breast cancer mortality: prospective data from the Cancer Prevention Study II, United States, 1982–1991. Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Apr 1;147(7):652–9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009506 9554604

18. Brewer HR, Jones ME, Schoemaker MJ, Ashworth A, Swerdlow AJ. Family history and risk of breast cancer: an analysis accounting for family structure. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Aug;165(1):193–200. doi: 10.1007/s10549-017-4325-2 28578505

19. Rieger AK and Mansmann UR. A Bayesian scoring rule on clustered event data for familial risk assessment–an example from colorectal cancer screening. Biom J. 2018 Jan;60(1):115–27. doi: 10.1002/bimj.201600264 29114914

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 12