Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tools for Stratifying Women into Risk Groups: A Systematic Review.
breast cancer screening
risk assessment
risk prediction models
risk-based screening
Journal
Cancers
ISSN: 2072-6694
Titre abrégé: Cancers (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101526829
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Feb 2023
09 Feb 2023
Historique:
received:
01
11
2022
revised:
31
01
2023
accepted:
01
02
2023
entrez:
25
2
2023
pubmed:
26
2
2023
medline:
26
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The benefits and harms of breast screening may be better balanced through a risk-stratified approach. We conducted a systematic review assessing the accuracy of questionnaire-based risk assessment tools for this purpose. Population: asymptomatic women aged ≥40 years; Intervention: questionnaire-based risk assessment tool (incorporating breast density and polygenic risk where available); Comparison: different tool applied to the same population; Primary outcome: breast cancer incidence; Scope: external validation studies identified from databases including Medline and Embase (period 1 January 2008-20 July 2021). We assessed calibration (goodness-of-fit) between expected and observed cancers and compared observed cancer rates by risk group. Risk of bias was assessed with PROBAST. Of 5124 records, 13 were included examining 11 tools across 15 cohorts. The Gail tool was most represented ( Some risk tools can identify groups of women at higher or lower breast cancer risk, but this is highly dependent on the setting and population.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The benefits and harms of breast screening may be better balanced through a risk-stratified approach. We conducted a systematic review assessing the accuracy of questionnaire-based risk assessment tools for this purpose.
METHODS
METHODS
Population: asymptomatic women aged ≥40 years; Intervention: questionnaire-based risk assessment tool (incorporating breast density and polygenic risk where available); Comparison: different tool applied to the same population; Primary outcome: breast cancer incidence; Scope: external validation studies identified from databases including Medline and Embase (period 1 January 2008-20 July 2021). We assessed calibration (goodness-of-fit) between expected and observed cancers and compared observed cancer rates by risk group. Risk of bias was assessed with PROBAST.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 5124 records, 13 were included examining 11 tools across 15 cohorts. The Gail tool was most represented (
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Some risk tools can identify groups of women at higher or lower breast cancer risk, but this is highly dependent on the setting and population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36831466
pii: cancers15041124
doi: 10.3390/cancers15041124
pmc: PMC9953796
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Australian Government
ID : contract reference 2000004049
Références
Ann Intern Med. 2019 Jan 1;170(1):51-58
pubmed: 30596875
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 Jan 19;10:7
pubmed: 20085642
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Apr;20(4):504-517
pubmed: 30799262
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Apr;132(2):365-77
pubmed: 22037780
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Apr 01;4(4):476-482
pubmed: 29346471
Int J Cancer. 2020 Dec 1;147(11):3059-3067
pubmed: 32484237
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Sep 1;4(9):e180174
pubmed: 29621362
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Nov 15;165(10):700-712
pubmed: 27548583
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 Sep;14(9):1137-1143
pubmed: 28648873
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 22;16(1):e0245375
pubmed: 33481864
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Feb 26;107(5):
pubmed: 25722355
Breast Cancer Res. 2018 Dec 20;20(1):155
pubmed: 30572910
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71
pubmed: 33782057
PLoS Med. 2018 Sep 4;15(9):e1002644
pubmed: 30180161
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 May;65:3-17
pubmed: 31848103
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jan 7;172(1):46-56
pubmed: 31766052
BMJ Open. 2021 Apr 12;11(4):e045078
pubmed: 33846154
Int J Epidemiol. 2022 Jan 6;50(6):1897-1911
pubmed: 34999890
Heart. 2012 May;98(9):691-8
pubmed: 22397946
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 Mar 1;112(3):278-285
pubmed: 31165158
Breast Cancer Res. 2012 Jan 30;14(1):R19
pubmed: 22289271
Br J Cancer. 2019 Jul;121(1):76-85
pubmed: 31114019
Clin Breast Cancer. 2014 Jun;14(3):212-220.e1
pubmed: 24461459
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 25;11(8):e0160966
pubmed: 27560501
Breast Cancer Res. 2017 Mar 14;19(1):29
pubmed: 28288659
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 16;164(4):256-67
pubmed: 26756737
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Mar 19;14:40
pubmed: 24645774
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Jul;164(2):263-284
pubmed: 28444533
Breast. 2019 Feb;43:39-47
pubmed: 30445378
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Oct;159(3):513-25
pubmed: 27565998
Cancer Causes Control. 2020 Jun;31(6):525-536
pubmed: 32253639
Breast Cancer Res. 2018 Dec 3;20(1):147
pubmed: 30509329
BMJ. 2009 Jun 29;338:b2393
pubmed: 19564179
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 Jun;29(6):1271-1277
pubmed: 32245787
Clin Med (Lond). 2017 Dec;17(6):545-551
pubmed: 29196356
J Breast Cancer. 2014 Sep;17(3):226-35
pubmed: 25320620
Eur Radiol. 2020 Oct;30(10):5417-5426
pubmed: 32358648
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 May;133(1):1-10
pubmed: 22076477
BMC Cancer. 2013 Dec 10;13:587
pubmed: 24321553
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 16;164(4):279-96
pubmed: 26757170
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Oct 16;13(20):
pubmed: 34680343
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 May 1;112(5):489-497
pubmed: 31556450
Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Sep;25(9):2563-2572
pubmed: 29717421
JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2019 Sep 19;3(4):pkz066
pubmed: 31853515
PLoS One. 2011 Feb 23;6(2):e16110
pubmed: 21373178