Back

Implementing Integrated Genomic Risk Assessments for Breast Cancer: Lessons Learned from the eMERGE Study

Liu, C.; Crew, K.; Morse, J.; Linder, J. E.; Antoniou, A. C.; Carver, T.; Cortopassi, J.; Peterson, J. F.; Ta, C. N.; Hoell, C.; Prows, C.; Kenny, E. E.; Miller, E.; Perez, E.; Jarvik, G. P.; Bland, H. T.; Odgis, J. A.; Mittendorf, K. F.; Bonini, K. E.; McGuffin, K.; Kottyan, L. C.; Maradik, M.; Limdi, N.; Abul-Husn, N. S.; Marathe, P. N.; Suckiel, S. A.; Aguilar, S.; Lewis, T. J.; Wei, W.-Q.; Luo, Y.; Freimuth, R. R.; Hakonarson, H.; Weng, C.; Chung, W. K.; Wiesner, G. L.

2025-05-23 genetic and genomic medicine
10.1101/2025.05.22.25328180 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo develop and implement a pipeline for integrated breast cancer risk assessment using the BOADICEA model within the eMERGE study, incorporating polygenic risk scores (PRS), monogenic variants, family history, and clinical factors. Materials and MethodsA pipeline was deployed across ten eMERGE clinical sites, integrating data from REDCap surveys, PRS reports, monogenic reports, and pedigrees via CanRisk Application Programming Interface (API). The process included design, customization, technical implementation, testing, and refinement. ResultsThe pipeline successfully generated integrated risk scores for >10,000 females. Of these, 3.6% were classified as high-risk ([≥]25% lifetime risk), and 0.9% harbored rare pathogenic variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, or PTEN. High PRS only scores were identified in 5.6% of participants. Among those with high PRS, 34% also had high-risk based on integrated scores. API and User Interface (UI) results were highly concordant, with an average difference of 0.13%. DiscussionKey challenges included integrating diverse data sources, handling missing data, and standardizing pedigree formats. Risk classification discrepancies highlighted the need for refined communication strategies. ConclusionThis study demonstrates the feasibility of PRS-integrated breast cancer risk assessment in clinical settings but underscores challenges in data integration and risk communication. Future work should enhance recalibration for diverse populations and streamline workflows for risk interpretation and update.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Genetics in Medicine
78 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
31.1%
2
Genetics in Medicine Open
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.7%
3
European Journal of Human Genetics
58 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
4
The American Journal of Human Genetics
234 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
Breast Cancer Research
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
6
Journal of Medical Genetics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.4%
8
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
9
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
10
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
11
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
12
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.3%
13
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
14
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
15
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
16
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
17
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 65%
1.1%
18
BMC Medical Genomics
50 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
19
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
20
Genetic Epidemiology
55 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
21
Annals of Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
22
Human Genetics and Genomics Advances
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
24
Trials
29 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
25
British Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.8%
27
International Journal of Epidemiology
88 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
28
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.6%
29
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 33%
0.6%