Polygenic risk scores stratify breast cancer risk among women with benign breast disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most breast biopsies are diagnosed as benign breast disease, with 1.5- to 4-fold increased breast cancer risk. Apart from pathologic diagnoses of atypical hyperplasia, few factors aid in breast cancer risk assessment of these patients. We assessed whether a 313-single nucleotide variation (formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism) polygenic risk score stratifies risk of benign breast disease patients. METHODS: We pooled data from 5 Breast Cancer Association Consortium case-control studies (mean age = 59.9 years), including 6706 participants with breast cancer and 8488 participants without breast cancer. Using logistic regression, we estimated breast cancer risk associations by self-reported benign breast disease history and strata of polygenic risk score, with median polygenic risk score category among women without benign breast disease as the referent. We assessed interactions and mediation of benign breast disease and polygenic risk score with breast cancer risk. RESULTS: Benign breast disease history was associated with increased breast cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] = 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37 to 1.60; P < .001). Polygenic risk score increased breast cancer risk, irrespective of benign breast disease history (Pinteraction = .48), with minimal evidence of mediation of either factor by the other. Women with benign breast disease and polygenic risk score in the highest tertile had more than twofold increased odds of breast cancer (OR = 2.73, 95% CI = 2.41 to 3.09), and those with benign breast disease and polygenic risk score in the lowest tertile experienced reduced breast cancer risk (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.70 to 0.91) compared with the referent group. Women with benign breast disease and polygenic risk score in the highest decile had a 3.7-fold increase (95% CI = 3.00 to 4.61) compared with those with median polygenic risk score without benign breast disease. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer risks are elevated among women with benign breast disease and increase progressively with polygenic risk score, suggesting that optimal combinations of these factors may improve risk stratification.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".