TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating BRCA mutation risk predictive models in a Chinese cohort in Taiwan
AU - Hung, Fei Hung
AU - Wang, Yong Alison
AU - Jian, Jhih Wei
AU - Peng, Hung Pin
AU - Hsieh, Ling Ling
AU - Hung, Chen Fang
AU - Yang, Max M.
AU - Yang, An Suei
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors wish to thank the National Center for Genome Medicine at Academia Sinica (Taipei, Taiwan) for their technical and bioinformatics support in the next generation sequencing of the germline gene panel. This work was supported by the health and welfare surcharge of tobacco products in Taiwan (Ministry of Health and Welfare) [MOHW107-TDU-B-212-114021], the Ministry of Science and Technology [MOST104-0210-01-09-02, MOST105-0210-01-13-01, MOST106-0210-01-15-02], and by the Taiwan Protein Project [MOST105-0210-01-12-01, MOST106-0210-01-15-04].
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, The Author(s).
PY - 2019/12
Y1 - 2019/12
N2 - Accurate estimation of carrier probabilities of cancer susceptibility gene mutations is an important part of pre-test genetic counselling. Many predictive models are available but their applicability in the Asian population is uncertain. We evaluated the performance of five BRCA mutation risk predictive models in a Chinese cohort of 647 women, who underwent germline DNA sequencing of a cancer susceptibility gene panel. Using areas under the curve (AUCs) on receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves as performance measures, the models did comparably well as in western cohorts (BOADICEA 0.75, BRCAPRO 0.73, Penn II 0.69, Myriad 0.68). For unaffected women with family history of breast or ovarian cancer (n = 144), BOADICEA, BRCAPRO, and Tyrer-Cuzick models had excellent performance (AUC 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, respectively). For women with both personal and family history of breast or ovarian cancer (n = 241), all models performed fairly well (BOADICEA 0.79, BRCAPRO 0.79, Penn II 0.75, Myriad 0.70). For women with personal history of breast or ovarian cancer but no family history (n = 262), most models did poorly. Between the two well-performed models, BOADICEA underestimated mutation risks while BRCAPRO overestimated mutation risks (expected/observed ratio 0.67 and 2.34, respectively). Among 424 women with personal history of breast cancer and available tumor ER/PR/HER2 data, the predictive models performed better for women with triple negative breast cancer (AUC 0.74 to 0.80) than for women with luminal or HER2 overexpressed breast cancer (AUC 0.63 to 0.69). However, incorporating ER/PR/HER2 status into the BOADICEA model calculation did not improve its predictive accuracy.
AB - Accurate estimation of carrier probabilities of cancer susceptibility gene mutations is an important part of pre-test genetic counselling. Many predictive models are available but their applicability in the Asian population is uncertain. We evaluated the performance of five BRCA mutation risk predictive models in a Chinese cohort of 647 women, who underwent germline DNA sequencing of a cancer susceptibility gene panel. Using areas under the curve (AUCs) on receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves as performance measures, the models did comparably well as in western cohorts (BOADICEA 0.75, BRCAPRO 0.73, Penn II 0.69, Myriad 0.68). For unaffected women with family history of breast or ovarian cancer (n = 144), BOADICEA, BRCAPRO, and Tyrer-Cuzick models had excellent performance (AUC 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, respectively). For women with both personal and family history of breast or ovarian cancer (n = 241), all models performed fairly well (BOADICEA 0.79, BRCAPRO 0.79, Penn II 0.75, Myriad 0.70). For women with personal history of breast or ovarian cancer but no family history (n = 262), most models did poorly. Between the two well-performed models, BOADICEA underestimated mutation risks while BRCAPRO overestimated mutation risks (expected/observed ratio 0.67 and 2.34, respectively). Among 424 women with personal history of breast cancer and available tumor ER/PR/HER2 data, the predictive models performed better for women with triple negative breast cancer (AUC 0.74 to 0.80) than for women with luminal or HER2 overexpressed breast cancer (AUC 0.63 to 0.69). However, incorporating ER/PR/HER2 status into the BOADICEA model calculation did not improve its predictive accuracy.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069525595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069525595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41598-019-46707-6
DO - 10.1038/s41598-019-46707-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 31308460
AN - SCOPUS:85069525595
SN - 2045-2322
VL - 9
JO - Scientific Reports
JF - Scientific Reports
IS - 1
M1 - 10229
ER -