PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Nguyen, Nam H.
AU  - Dodd-Eaton, Elissa B.
AU  - Corredor, Jessica L.
AU  - Woodman-Ross, Jacynda
AU  - Green, Sierra
AU  - Hernandez, Nathaniel D.
AU  - Gutierrez Barrera, Angelica M.
AU  - Arun, Banu K.
AU  - Wang, Wenyi
TI  - Validating risk prediction models for multiple primaries and competing cancer outcomes in families with Li-Fraumeni syndrome using clinically ascertained data at a single institute
AID  - 10.1101/2023.08.31.23294849
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.08.31.23294849
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/02/2023.08.31.23294849.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/02/2023.08.31.23294849.full
AB  - Purpose There exists a barrier between developing and disseminating risk prediction models in clinical settings. We hypothesize this barrier may be lifted by demonstrating the utility of these models using incomplete data that are collected in real clinical sessions, as compared to the commonly used research cohorts that are meticulously collected.Patients and methods Genetic counselors (GCs) collect family history when patients (i.e., probands) come to MD Anderson Cancer Center for risk assessment of Li-Fraumeni syndrome, a genetic disorder characterized by deleterious germline mutations in the TP53 gene. Our clinical counseling-based (CCB) cohort consists of 3,297 individuals across 124 families (522 cases of single primary cancer and 125 cases of multiple primary cancers). We applied our software suite LFSPRO to make risk predictions and assessed performance in discrimination using area under the curve (AUC), and in calibration using observed/expected (O/E) ratio.Results For prediction of deleterious TP53 mutations, we achieved an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70 – 0.91) and an O/E ratio of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.70 – 1.21). Using the LFSPRO.MPC model to predict the onset of the second cancer, we obtained an AUC of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.58 – 0.82). Using the LFSPRO.CS model to predict the onset of different cancer types as the first primary, we achieved AUCs between 0.70 and 0.83 for sarcoma, breast cancer, or other cancers combined.Conclusion We describe a study that fills in the critical gap in knowledge for the utility of risk prediction models. Using a CCB cohort, our previously validated models have demonstrated good performance and outperformed the standard clinical criteria. Our study suggests better risk counseling may be achieved by GCs using these already-developed mathematical models.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was funded by the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas [RP200383] and the National Institutes of Health [R01CA239342, P30 CA016672].Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Office of Human Subject Protection/IRB of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center gave ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data in the present study are available contingent upon appropriate institutional data transfer agreement.