TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations
AU - Parmigiani, Giovanni
AU - Chen, Sining
AU - Iversen, Edwin S.
AU - Friebel, Tara M.
AU - Finkelstein, Dianne M.
AU - Anton-Culver, Hoda
AU - Ziogas, Argyrios
AU - Weber, Barbara L.
AU - Eisen, Andrea
AU - Malone, Kathleen E.
AU - Daling, Janet R.
AU - Hsu, Li
AU - Ostrander, Elaine A.
AU - Peterson, Leif E.
AU - Schildkraut, Joellen M.
AU - Isaacs, Claudine
AU - Corio, Camille
AU - Leondaridis, Leoni
AU - Tomlinson, Gail
AU - Amos, Christopher I.
AU - Strong, Louise C.
AU - Berry, Donald A.
AU - Weitzel, Jeffrey N.
AU - Sand, Sharon
AU - Dutson, Debra
AU - Kerber, Rich
AU - Peshkin, Beth N.
AU - Euhus, David M.
PY - 2007/10/2
Y1 - 2007/10/2
N2 - Background: Deleterious mutations of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes confer susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. At least 7 models for estimating the probabilities of having a mutation are used widely in clinical and scientific activities; however, the merits and limitations of these models are not fully understood. Objective: To systematically quantify the accuracy of the following publicly available models to predict mutation carrier status: BRCAPRO, family history assessment tool, Finnish, Myriad, National Cancer Institute, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale University. Design: Cross-sectional validation study, using model predictions and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation status of patients different from those used to develop the models. Setting: Multicenter study across Cancer Genetics Network participating centers. Patients: 3 population-based samples of participants in research studies and 8 samples from genetic counseling clinics. Measurements: Discrimination between individuals testing positive for a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 from those testing negative, as measured by the c-statistic, and sensitivity and specificity of model predictions. Results: The 7 models differ in their predictions. The better-performing models have a c-statistic around 80%. BRCAPRO has the largest c-statistic overall and in all but 2 patient subgroups, although the margin over other models is narrow in many strata. Outside of high-risk populations, all models have high false-negative and false-positive rates across a range of probability thresholds used to refer for mutation testing. Limitation: Three recently published models were not included. Conclusions: All models identify women who probably carry a deleterious mutation of BRCA1 or BRCA2 with adequate discrimination to support individualized genetic counseling, although discrimination varies across models and populations.
AB - Background: Deleterious mutations of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes confer susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. At least 7 models for estimating the probabilities of having a mutation are used widely in clinical and scientific activities; however, the merits and limitations of these models are not fully understood. Objective: To systematically quantify the accuracy of the following publicly available models to predict mutation carrier status: BRCAPRO, family history assessment tool, Finnish, Myriad, National Cancer Institute, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale University. Design: Cross-sectional validation study, using model predictions and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation status of patients different from those used to develop the models. Setting: Multicenter study across Cancer Genetics Network participating centers. Patients: 3 population-based samples of participants in research studies and 8 samples from genetic counseling clinics. Measurements: Discrimination between individuals testing positive for a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 from those testing negative, as measured by the c-statistic, and sensitivity and specificity of model predictions. Results: The 7 models differ in their predictions. The better-performing models have a c-statistic around 80%. BRCAPRO has the largest c-statistic overall and in all but 2 patient subgroups, although the margin over other models is narrow in many strata. Outside of high-risk populations, all models have high false-negative and false-positive rates across a range of probability thresholds used to refer for mutation testing. Limitation: Three recently published models were not included. Conclusions: All models identify women who probably carry a deleterious mutation of BRCA1 or BRCA2 with adequate discrimination to support individualized genetic counseling, although discrimination varies across models and populations.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34848873795&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34848873795&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00002
DO - 10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00002
M3 - Article
C2 - 17909205
AN - SCOPUS:34848873795
VL - 147
SP - 441
EP - 450
JO - Annals of Internal Medicine
JF - Annals of Internal Medicine
SN - 0003-4819
IS - 7
ER -