4.6 Article

Combination of phenotype and polygenic risk score in breast cancer risk evaluation in the Spanish population: a case -control study

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07584-9

关键词

Polygenic risk score; Predictive test; Identification of high risk women; Risk algorithms

类别

资金

  1. Sistemas Genomicos S.L.
  2. IVACE (Instituto Valenciano de competitividad empresarial) [IMIDTA/2016/75, IMIDTA/2018/7]
  3. AVI (Agencia Valenciana de Innovacion) [INNTAL21/197002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundIn recent years, the identification of genetic and phenotypic biomarkers of cancer for prevention, early diagnosis and patient stratification has been a main objective of research in the field. Different multivariable models that use biomarkers have been proposed for the evaluation of individual risk of developing breast cancer.MethodsThis is a case control study based on a population-based cohort. We describe and evaluate a multivariable model that incorporates 92 Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (Supplementary Table S1) and five different phenotypic variables and which was employed in a Spanish population of 642 healthy women and 455 breast cancer patients.ResultsOur model allowed us to stratify two groups: high and low risk of developing breast cancer. The 9th decile included 1% of controls vs 9% of cases, with an odds ratio (OR) of 12.9 and a p-value of 3.43E-07. The first decile presented an inverse proportion: 1% of cases and 9% of controls, with an OR of 0.097 and a p-value of 1.86E-08.ConclusionsThese results indicate the capacity of our multivariable model to stratify women according to their risk of developing breast cancer. The major limitation of our analysis is the small cohort size. However, despite the limitations, the results of our analysis provide proof of concept in a poorly studied population, and opens up the possibility of using this method in the routine screening of the Spanish population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据