Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 98, Issue 17, 2006, Pages 1204-1214

  Barlow, William E ^a,b,c   White, Emily ^b   Ballard Barbash, Rachel ^d   Vacek, Pamela M ^e   Titus Ernstoff, Linda ^f   Carney, Patricia A ^f,g   Tice, Jeffrey A ^h   Buist, Diana S M ^b,c   Geller, Berta M ⁱ   Rosenberg, Robert ^j   Yankaskas, Bonnie C ^k   Kerlikowske, Karla ^h,l  

^a Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^d NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^g OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^l UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENSITY; ETHNOLOGY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HORMONAL THERAPY; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION; POSTMENOPAUSE; PREMENOPAUSE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RACE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; LOGISTIC MODELS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; POSTMENOPAUSE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREMENOPAUSE; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REGISTRIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SEER PROGRAM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33748692404     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: 14602105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djj331     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. 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;81: 1879-86.
2. Gail MH, Costantino JP. Validating and improving models for projecting the absolute risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:334-5.
3. Gail MH, Benichou J. Validation studies on a model for breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86:573-5.
4. Spiegelman D, Colditz GA, Hunter D, Hertzmark E. Validation of the Gail et al. model for predicting individual breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86:600-7.
5. Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA. Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:358-66.
6. Rockhill B, Byrne C, Rosner B, Louie MM, Colditz G. Breast cancer risk prediction with a log-incidence model: Evaluation of accuracy. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:856-61.
7. MacKarem G, Roche CA, Hughes KS. The effectiveness of the Gail model in estimating risk for development of breast cancer in women under 40 years of age. Breast J 2001;7:34-9.
8. Amir E, Evans DG, Shenton A, Lalloo F, Moran A, Boggis C, et al. Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme. J Med Genet 2003;40:807-14.
9. Boyle P, Mezzetti M, La Vecchia C, Franceschi S, Decarli A, Robertson C. Contribution of three components to individual cancer risk predicting breast cancer risk in Italy. Eur J Cancer Prev 2004;13:183-91.
10. Kaur JS, Roubidoux MA, Sloan J, Novotny P. Can the Gail model be useful in American Indian and Alaska Native populations? Cancer 2004;100:906-12.
11. Medina-Franco H, Garza E, Gabilondo B, Gaona-Luviano P. Risk of invasive breast cancer in Mexican population and patterns of screening and prophylaxis. Rev Invest Clin 2004;56:422-6.
12. Pastor Climente IP, Morales Suarez-Varela MM, Llopis Gonzalez A, Magraner Gil JF. Application of the Gail method of calculating risk in the population of Valencia. Clin Transl Oncol 2005;7:336-43.
13. Bondy ML, Lustbader ED, Halabi S, Ross E, Vogel VG. Validation of a breast cancer risk assessment model in women with a positive family history. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86:620-5.
14. Brinkmann E, Morrow M. The surgeon's role in breast cancer chemoprevention. Breast Dis 2001;12:103-12.
15. Dunn BK, Ford LG. From adjuvant therapy to breast cancer prevention: BCPT and STAR. Breast J 2001;7:144-57.
16. Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, Cronin WM, Wolmark N. The study of tamoxifen and raloxifene: Preliminary enrollment data from a randomized breast cancer risk reduction trial. Clin Breast Cancer 2002;3:153-9.
17. Lewis CL, Kinsinger LS, Harris RP, Schwartz RJ. Breast cancer risk in primary care: Implications for chemoprevention. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164:1897-903.
18. Brown P. Risk assessment: Controversies and management of moderate- to high-risk individuals. Breast J 2005; 11(Suppl 1):S11-9.
19. Higgins SA, Matloff ET, Rimm DL, Dziura J, Haffty BG, King BL. Patterns of reduced nipple aspirate fluid production and ductal lavage cellularity in women at high risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2005;7:R1017-22.
20. Freedman AN, Graubard BI, Rao SR, McCaskill-Stevens W, Ballard-Barbash R, Gail MH. Estimates of the number of US women who could benefit from tamoxifen for breast cancer chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:526-32.
21. Bernatsky S, Ramsey-Goldman R, Boivin JF, Joseph L, Moore AD, Rajan R, et al. Do traditional Gail model risk factors account for increased breast cancer in women with lupus? J Rheumatol 2003;30:1505-7.
22. Bernatsky S, Clarke A, Ramsey-Goldman R, Joseph L, Boivin JF, Rajan R, et al. Hormonal exposures and breast cancer in a sample of women with systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43:1178-81.
23. Olson JE, Sellers TA, Iturria SJ, Hartmann LC. Bilateral oophorectomy and breast cancer risk reduction among women with a family history. Cancer Detect Prev 2004;28:357-60.
24. Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, Fishell EK, Little LE, Miller AB, et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: Results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:670-5.
25. Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, Parekh N, Salane M, Brinton LA, et al. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: Effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1622-9.
26. Vacek PM, Geller BM. A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:715-22.
27. Ziv E, Tice J, Smith-Bindman R, Shepherd J, Cummings S, Kerlikowske K. Mammographic density and estrogen receptor status of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:2090-5.
28. Boyd NF, Rommens JM, Vogt K, Lee V, Hopper JL, Yaffe MJ, et al. Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 2005;6:798-808.
29. Kerlikowske K, Shepherd J, Creasman J, Tice JA, Ziv E, Cummings SR. Are breast density and bone mineral density independent risk factors for breast cancer? J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:368-74.
30. Maskarinec G, Pagano I, Lurie G, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: The multiethnic cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:743-52.
31. Tice JA, Cummings SR, Ziv E, Kerlikowske K. Mammographic breast density and the Gail model for breast cancer risk prediction in a screening population. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;94:115-22.
32. Cleary MP, Maihle NJ. The role of body mass index in the relative risk of developing premenopausal versus postmenopausal breast cancer. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1997;216:28-43.
33. La Vecchia C, Negri E, Franceschi S, Talamini R, Bruzzi P, Palli D, et al. Body mass index and post-menopausal breast cancer: An age-specific analysis. Br J Cancer 1997;75:441-4.
34. Chen CL, Weiss NS, Newcomb P, Barlow W, White E. Hormone therapy in relation to breast cancer. JAMA 2002;287:734-41.
35. McCann J, Stockton D, Godward S. Impact of false-positive mammography on subsequent screening attendance and risk of cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2002;4:R11.
36. Beral V for the Million Women Study Collaborators. Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Lancet 2003; 362:419-27.
37. Chlebowski RT, Hendrix SL, Langer RD, Stefanick ML, Gass M, Lane D, et al. Influence of estrogen plus progestin on breast cancer and mammography in healthy postmenopausal women: The women's health initiative randomized trial. JAMA 2003;289:3243-53.
38. Kerlikowske K, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, Weaver DL, Buist DS, Barlow WE, et al. Prognostic characteristics of breast cancer among postmenopausal hormone users in a screened population. J Clin Oncol 2003;21: 4314-21.
39. Feigelson HS, Jonas CR, Teras LR, Thun MJ, Calle EE. Weight gain, body mass index, hormone therapy, and postmenopausal breast cancer in a large prospective study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:220-4.
40. Stahlberg C, Pedersen AT, Lynge E, Andersen ZJ, Keiding N, Hundrup YA, et al. Increased risk of breast cancer following different regimens of hormone therapy frequently used in Europe. Int J Cancer 2004;109:721-7.
41. McTiernan A, Martin CF, Peck JD, Aragaki AK, Chlebowski RT, Pisano ED, et al. Estrogen-plus-progestin use and mammographic density in postmenopausal women: Women's health initiative randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1366-76.
42. Zhu K, Caulfield J, Hunter S, Roland CL, Payne-Wilks K, Texter L. Body mass index and breast cancer risk in African American women. Ann Epidemiol 2005;15:123-8.
43. Bondy ML, Newman LA. Breast cancer risk assessment models: Applicability to African-American women. Cancer 2003;97(Suppl):230-5.
44. Edwards BK, Brown ML, Wingo PA, Howe HL, Ward E, Ries LA, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2002, featuring population-based trends in cancer treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97: 1407-27.
45. Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, Ernster VL, Rosenberg RD, Carney PA, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: A national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169:1001-8.
46. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, Burke W, Costanza ME, Evans WP 3rd, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 2003;53:141-69.
47. Sickles EA, Miglioretti DL, Ballard-Barbash R, Geller BM, Leung JW, Rosenberg RD, et al. Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. Radiology 2005;235:775-90.
48. Miglioretti DL, Rutter CM, Geller BM, Cutter G, Barlow WE, Rosenberg R, et al. Effect of breast augmentation on the accuracy of mammography and cancer characteristics. JAMA 2004;291:442-50.
49. Carney PA, Geller BM, Moffett H, Ganger M, Sewell M, Barlow WE, et al. Current medicolegal and confidentiality issues in large, multicenter research programs. Am J Epidemiol 2000;152:371-8.
50. TM), 4th ed. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology; 2003.
51. Berg WA, Campassi C, Langenberg P, Sexton MJ. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: Inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and fi nal assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1769-77.
52. Lee-Han H, Cooke G, Boyd NF. Quantitative evaluation of mammographic densities: A comparison of methods of assessment. Eur J Cancer Prev 1995;4: 285-92.
53. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT® users guide, version 9. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc; 2002.
54. Stata Corp. Stata statistical software: Release 8.0. College Station (TX): Stata Corporation; 2003.
55. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. 2nd ed. New York (NY): Wiley; 2000.
56. Colditz G, Rosner B, Chen WY, Holmes M, Hankinson SE. Risk factors for breast cancer according to estrogen and progesterone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:218-28.
57. Zeger SL, Liang KY. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics 1986;42:121-30.
58. Miglioretti DL, Heagerty PJ. Marginal modeling of multilevel binary data with time-varying covariates. Biostatistics 2004;5:381-98.
59. Kelsey JL, Thompson WD, Evans AS. Methods in observational epidemiology. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 1986.
60. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Incidence-SEER 9 Regs Public-Use, Nov 24 Sub (1973-2002). National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch. Released April 2005, based on the November 2004 submission. Available at: http://www.seer.cancer.gov.
61. Surveillance Research Program. National Cancer Institute SEER*Stat software, version 6.1.4. Available at: http://www.seer.cancer.gov/ seerstat.
62. Vacek PM, Geller BM. A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:715-22.
63. Buist DS, Porter PL, Lehman C, Taplin SH, White E. Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:1432-40.
64. Kerlikowske K, Barclay J, Grady D, Sickles EA, Ernster V. Comparison of risk factors for ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:76-82.
65. Burack RC, George J, Gurney JG. Mammography use among women as a function of age and patient involvement in decision-making. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:817-21.
66. Swan J, Breen N, Coates RJ, Rimer BK, Lee NC. Progress in cancer screening practices in the United States: Results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Cancer 2003;97:1528-40.
67. Maskarinec G, Pagano I, Lurie G, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: The multiethnic cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:743-52.
68. Colditz G, Rosner B. Cumulative risk of breast cancer to age 70 years according to risk factor status: Data from the Nurses' Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 2000;152:950-64.
69. Ross RK, Paganini-Hill A, Wan P, Pike M. Effect of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer: Estrogen versus estrogen plus progestin. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:328-32.
70. Schairer C, Lubin J, Troisi R, Sturgeon S, Brinton LA, Hoover R. Menopausal estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. JAMA 2000;283:485-91.
71. Newcomb PA, Titus-Ernstoff L, Egan K, Trentham-Dietz A, Baron J, Storer B, et al. Postmenopausal estrogen and progestin use in relation to breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:593-600.
72. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, LaCroix AZ, Kooperberg C, Stefanick ML, et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: Principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;288:321-33.
73. Lambe M, Hsieh C-C, Trichopoulos D, Ekbom A, Pavia A, Adami H-O. Transient increase in risk of breast cancer after giving birth. N Engl J Med 1994;331:5-9.
74. Trichopoulos D, MacMahon B, Cole P. Menopause and breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 1972;48:605-13.
75. Lilienfeld AM. The relationship of cancer of the female breast to artificial menopause and marital status. Cancer 1956;9:927-34.
76. Pike M, Ross R, Spicer D. Problems involved in including women with simple hysterectomy in epidemiologic studies measuring the effects of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 1998;147:718-21.
77. Rockhill B, Colditz G, Rosner B. Bias in breast cancer analyses due to error in age at menopause. Am J Epidemiol 2000;151:404-8.
78. Swanson CA, Brinton LA, Taylor PR, Licitra LM, Ziegler RG, Schairer C. Body size and breast cancer risk assessed in women participating in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Am J Epidemiol 1989;130:1133-41.
79. Sabatino SA, Burns RB, Davis RB, Phillips RS, Chen YH, McCarthy EP. Breast carcinoma screening and risk perception among women at increased risk for breast carcinoma: Results from a national survey. Cancer 2004;100:2338-46.
80. Vach W, Blettner M. Logistic regression with incompletely observed categorical covariates - investigating the sensitivity against violation of the missing at random assumption. Stat Med 1995;14:1315-29.
81. Benichou J, Byrne C, Capece LA, Carroll LE, Hurt-Mullen K, Pee DY, et al. Secular stability and reliability of measurements of the percentage of dense tissue on mammograms. Cancer Detect Prev 2003;27:266-74.
82. Freedman AN, Seminara D, Gail MH, Hartge P, Colditz GA, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Cancer risk prediction models: A workshop on development, evaluation, and application. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:715-23.
83. Parascandola M. Ethics and breast cancer risk assessment. Ann Epidemiol 2000;10:461.
84. Salih AK, Fentiman IS. Breast cancer prevention. Int J Clin Pract 2002; 56:267-71.
85. Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: Relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 2004;230:29-41.
86. Weik JL, Lum SS, Esquivel PA, Tully RJ, Bae WC, Petersen FF, et al. The Gail model predicts breast cancer in women with suspicious radiographic lesions. Am J Surg 2005;190:526-9.
87. Weaver DL, Vacek PM, Skelly JM, Geller BM. Predicting biopsy outcome after mammography: What is the likelihood the patient has invasive or in situ breast cancer? Ann Surg Oncol 2005;12:660-73.
88. Lewis CM, Cler LR, Bu DW, Zochbauer-Muller S, Milchgrub S, Naftalis EZ, et al. Promoter hypermethylation in benign breast epithelium in relation to predicted breast cancer risk. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:166-72.
89. Fabian CJ, Kimler BF, Zalles CM, Klemp JR, Kamel S, Zeiger S, et al. Short-term breast cancer prediction by random periareolar fine-needle aspiration cytology and the Gail risk model. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1217-27.