Abstract 4623: External validation of the BOADICEA model for predicting ovarian cancer risk: The Breast Cancer Family Registry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Purpose: In the U.S., ovarian cancer is the most fatal of the gynecological cancers with an overall five-year survival rate of 47.6%. While women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are at a much higher risk of developing ovarian cancer, mutations in these genes account for less than 50 percent of the familial aggregation of ovarian cancer. Being able to identify women at greatest risk, including those with increased familial risk without a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, is critical for clinical decision-making; however, there is a lack of risk prediction models for ovarian cancer and those that do exist have modest discriminatory power. Therefore, we externally validated the BOADICEA model, a breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction model based on a woman's multigenerational family history and genetic information, for predicting ovarian cancer risk in an independent, prospective cohort of women. Methods: We used data from the Breast Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), a cohort of families with breast and ovarian cancer at baseline that have been prospectively followed. We assessed the 10-year performance of the BOADICEA model (version 3) for ovarian cancer risk overall, and by known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation statuses. We included women who did not have an ovarian cancer diagnosis or a bilateral oophorectomy prior to baseline, and who had sufficient data to calculate the 10-year BOADICEA risk score. We assessed model calibration using the ratio of the expected (E) to the observed (O) number of ovarian cancer cases in the cohort (E/O), and model discrimination by the concordance statistics (C-statistic) derived from the receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: There were 125 prospective ovarian cancer cases over a median of 12.3 years of follow-up among 18,534 women eligible for this analysis. For the overall cohort, the BOADICEA model was well calibrated with an E/O of 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.70, 1.08). There was a suggestion of model underprediction in the top quartile of assigned risk (1.33% observed risk vs. 1.09% predicted risk), however it was not statistically significant (p=0.15). The C-statistic was 0.77, 95% CI (0.73, 0.82). For known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers combined, the E/O was 0.91, 95% CI (0.63, 1.32) and the C-statistic was 0.75, 95% CI (0.67, 0.83). For non-carriers, the E/O was 0.85, 95% CI (0.65, 1.11) and the C-statistic was 0.68, 95% CI (0.59, 0.74). Conclusion: The BOADICEA model is well-calibrated in predicting ovarian cancer risk over 10 years and has good discriminatory power for women at increased familial risk of breast and ovarian cancer, with or without a known mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Therefore, BOADICEA has clinical utility for evaluating ovarian cancer risk based on a woman's family cancer history and genetic information. Citation Format: Jennifer S. Ferris, Jeanine M. Genkinger, Mary Beth Terry, Yuyan Liao, Robert J. MacInnis, Irene L. Andrulis, Saundra S. Buys, Mary B. Daly, Esther M. John, John L. Hopper. External validation of the BOADICEA model for predicting ovarian cancer risk: The Breast Cancer Family Registry [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 4623.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,061 | 0,096 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».