Towards Personalized Breast Cancer Risk Management: A Thai Cohort Study on Polygenic Risk Scores
Tongsima, S.; Nakhonsri, V.; Ngamphiw, C.; Wasitthankasem, R.; Wilantho, A.; Wangkumhang, P.; Pithukpakorn, M.; Eu-ahsunthornwattana, J.; Boonbangyang, M.
Show abstract
Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) are now playing an important role in predicting overall risk of breast cancer risk by means of adding contribution factors across independent genetic variants influencing the disease. However, PRS models may work better in some ethnic populations compared to others, thus requiring populaion-specific validation. This study evaluates the performance of 140 previously published PRS models in a Thai population, an underrepresented ethnic group. To rigorously evaluate the performance of 140 breast PRS models, we employed generalized linear models (GLM) combined with a robust evaluation strategy, including Five-fold cross validation and bootstrap analysis in which each model was tested across 1,000 bootstrap iterations to ensure the robustness of our findings and to identify models with consistently strong predictive ability. Among the 140 models evaluated, 38 demonstrated robust predictive ability, identified through > 163 bootstrap iterations (95% CI: 163.88). PGS004688 exhibited the highest performance, achieving an AUROC of 0.5930 (95% CI: 0.5903-0.5957) and a McFaddens pseudo R2 of 0.0146 (95% CI: 0.0139-0.0153). Women in the 90th percentile of PRS had a 1.83-fold increased risk of breast cancer compared to those within the 30th to 70th percentiles (95% CI: 1.04-3.18). This study highlights the importance of local validation for PRS models derived from diverse populations, demonstrating their potential for personalized breast cancer risk assessment. Model PGS004688, with its robust performance and significant risk stratification, warrants further investigation for clinical implementation in breast cancer screening and prevention strategies. Our findings emphasize the need for adapting and utilizing PRS in diverse populations to provide more accessible public health solutions.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A genome-wide association study of mammographic texture variation 95%
- Comparative validation of the BOADICEA and Tyrer-Cuzick breast cancer risk models incorporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk in a population-based prospective cohort 94%
- Putative breast cancer risk variants from populations of South Asian ancestry are under-represented in public variant classification databases 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Prevalence and spectrum of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in multiethnic cohort of breast cancer patients in Brunei Darussalam 95%
- BREAst screening Tailored for HEr (BREATHE) - A Study Protocol On Personalised Risk-based Breast Cancer Screening Programme 94%
- The Impact of Variance in Carnitine Palmitoyltransferase-1 Expression on Breast Cancer Prognosis is Stratified by Clinical and Anthropometric Factors 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Hormone Receptor-status Prediction in Breast Cancer Using Gene Expression Profiles and Their Macroscopic Landscape 94%
- Impact of BRCA mutation status on tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), response to treatment, and prognosis in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. 93%
- Accurate Screening for Early-Stage Breast Cancer by Detection and Profiling of Circulating Tumor Cells 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- A genome-wide epistatic network underlies the molecular architecture of continuous color variation of body extremities: a rabbit model 89%
- Gene expression profiles and pathway enrichment analysis to identification of differentially expressed gene and signaling pathways in epithelial ovarian cancer based on high-throughput RNA-seq data 87%
- Minimum Error Calibration and Normalization for Genomic Copy Number Analysis 87%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.