JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
VALIDATION STUDY
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Validity of models for predicting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

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.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Group 7SearchHeart failure treatmentPapersTopicsCollectionsEffects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for the Treatment of Patients With Heart Failure Importance: Only 1 class of glucose-lowering agents-sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors-has been reported to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events primarily by reducingSeptember 1, 2017: JAMA CardiologyAssociations of albuminuria in patients with chronic heart failure: findings in the ALiskiren Observation of heart Failure Treatment study.CONCLUSIONS: Increased UACR is common in patients with heart failure, including non-diabetics. Urinary albumin creatininineJul, 2011: European Journal of Heart FailureRandomized Controlled TrialEffects of Liraglutide on Clinical Stability Among Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Review

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app