PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Nguyen, Tuong L. AU - Schmidt, Daniel F. AU - Makalic, Enes AU - Maskarinec, Gertraud AU - Li, Shuai AU - Dite, Gillian AU - Aung, Ye K. AU - Evans, Christopher F. AU - Trinh, Ho N. AU - Baglietto, Laura AU - Stone, Jennifer AU - Song, Yun-Mi AU - Sung, Joohon AU - MacInnis, Robert J. AU - Dugué, Pierre-Antoine AU - Dowty, James G. AU - Jenkins, Mark A. AU - Milne, Roger L. AU - Southey, Melissa C. AU - Giles, Graham G. AU - Hopper, John L. TI - Novel mammogram-based measures improve breast cancer risk prediction beyond an established measure of mammographic density AID - 10.1101/2020.05.24.20111815 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.05.24.20111815 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/26/2020.05.24.20111815.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/26/2020.05.24.20111815.full AB - Background Mammograms contain information that predicts breast cancer risk. We recently discovered two novel mammogram-based breast cancer risk measures based on image brightness (Cirrocumulus) and texture (Cirrus). It is not known whether these measures improve risk prediction when fitted together, and with an established measure of mammographic density (Cumulus).Methods We used three studies consisting of: 168 interval cases and 498 matched controls; 422 screen-detected cases and 1,197 matched controls; and 354 younger-diagnosis cases and 944 frequency-matched controls. We conducted conditional and unconditional logistic regression analyses of individually-and frequency-matched studies, respectively. We reported risk gradients as change in odds ratio per standard deviation of controls after adjusting for age and body mass index (OPERA). For models involving multiple measures, we calculated the OPERA equivalent to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.Results For interval, screen-detected and younger-diagnosis cancer, the best fitting models (OPERAs [95% confidence intervals]) were: Cumulus (1.81 [1.41 to 2.31]) and Cirrus (1.7 [1.38 to 2.14]); Cirrus (1.49 [1.32 to 1.67]) and Cirrocumulus (1.16 [1.03 to 1.31]); and Cirrus (1.70 [1.48 to 1.94]) and Cirrocumulus (1.46 [1.27 to 1.68]), respectively. Their OPERA equivalents were: 2.35, 1.58, and 2.28, respectively.Conclusions Our mammogram-based measures improved risk prediction beyond and, except for interval cancers, negated the influence of conventional mammographic density. Combined, these new mammogram-based risk measures are at least as accurate as the current polygenetic risk scores (OPERA ~ 1.6) in predicting, on a population basis, women who will be diagnosed with breast cancer.Competing Interest StatementGSD receives funding from Genetic Technologies Ltd for work unrelated to this study.Funding StatementThis research was supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (251533, 209057, and 504711), the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, Cancer Council Victoria, Cancer Council NSW, Cancer Australia, and the National Breast Cancer Foundation. It has also been supported by the Breast Cancer Network Australia, the National Breast Cancer Foundation, Victoria Breast Cancer Research Consortium and was further supported by infrastructure provided by the Cancer Council Victoria and the University of Melbourne. We thank the Victorian Cancer Registry, BreastScreen Victoria, the Australian Mammographic Density Research Facility. TLN has been supported by Cure Cancer Australia Foundation through Cancer Australia Priority-Driven Collaborative Cancer Research Scheme (1159399). TLN and SL have been supported by Victorian Cancer Council Post-Doctoral Fellowships and grants from the Picchi Foundation, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre. JLH is a NHMRC Senior Principal Research Fellow. MAJ and MCS are NHMRC Senior Research Fellows.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:This study was approved by the ethical committee of the University of MelbourneAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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 and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesFor data accessment, please contact the corresponding author.