Vachon, Celine M.

Background: Several breast cancer (BC) risk prediction models have been developed to provide personal risk assessments. Though individually validated, their performance has not been systematically evaluated across a wide range of populations or ages. Methods: We harmonized individual-level baseline questionnaire data and incident BC diagnoses from 21 cohorts from North America, Europe, and Australia participating in the Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Project. Five-year absolute risk of invasive BC was estimated for five established risk prediction models using classical risk factors only. Discrimination was evaluated by area under the curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed using average and risk-decile specific expected to observed (E/O) ratios. Performance metrics were meta-analyzed across cohorts and models. Metaregression tested associations between cohort characteristics and performance metrics. Results: This analysis included 1,595,977 women aged 20-75 years, enrolled in studies between 1976-2015, with 19,062 (1.2%) invasive BC cases ascertained within 5 years from exposure assessment. Age-adjusted AUCs were similar across models and cohorts (pooled AUCs by model: 0.57-0.58), while E/O ratios varied substantially (pooled E/O ratios by model: 0.83-1.25). Overestimation was common among predicted high-risk individuals (>3%). No appreciable differences in model performance by cohort age, birth year, race, and variable missingness emerged. Calibration improved after assigning race-specific incidence rates. Conclusion: Existing BC risk prediction models provided similar risk discrimination across multiple cohorts, although there was overestimation of risk for high-risk individuals. Performance variation across cohorts was not driven by specific characteristics, which supports development of a unified risk model for diverse populations that leverages appropriate incidence rates.

Abstract Background Breast cancer is etiologically heterogeneous, but which risk factors differ in their associations across tumor subtypes remains unclear. We conducted a large, pooled analysis to evaluate independent, dose-response associations between breast cancer risk factors and quantitative tumor features. Methods Analyses of 15,731 invasive breast cancers from 24 studies evaluated associations (p-trend) between reproductive and hormonal factors, body mass index (BMI), alcohol, smoking, and family history in relation to quantitative immunohistochemistry measures on tissue microarrays (ER, PR, HER2, KI67, TP53) and tumor grade. Analyses in a subset of 10 population-based studies estimated subtype-specific odds ratios (ORs) comparing cases to controls. A Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP) <0.2 was used to identify associations with strong statistical evidence. Results Nulliparity and later age at menopause were associated with higher ER-positivity (p-trend=0.021 and 0.001, respectively), with corresponding OR[ER+] (95% CI) = 1.49 (1.16-1.90) for nulliparous vs. parous and 1.07 (1.03-1.11) per 5 years. Current combined menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use was associated with lower grade (p-trend<0.001), with OR [grade1] = 3.37 (2.69-4.21) for current vs. never users. Higher BMI was associated with lower ER-positivity and higher grade in premenopausal women (p-trend<0.001 and <0.001), with OR[ER+] = 0.80 (0.74-0.87) and OR[grade1] = 0.75 (0.63-0.88) per 5 units, and with higher PR-positivity and higher grade in postmenopausal women (p-trend<0.001 and <0.001), with OR[PR+] = 1.08 (1.03-1.14) and OR[grade 3] = 1.10 (1.04-1.17) per 5 units. Conclusion This pooled analysis of 15,731 cases showed that nulliparity, age at menopause, MHT, and BMI have independent, dose-response associations with ER, PR, and grade, clarifying patterns of etiologic heterogeneity. Associations with HER2, KI67 and TP53, or other risk factors did not meet our threshold for strong evidence.

Image-derived artificial intelligence (AI) risk models have shown promise in short-term risk assessment for improving breast cancer (BC) screening. No image-derived long-term AI risk model for primary prevention has been developed and externally validated. Individuals aged 31 to 94 years were recruited between 2010 and 2020 in two population-based case cohorts (Olmsted County, Minnesota, US, and KARMA, Sweden) and one hospital-based case-control study (EMBED, Atlanta, US). Median follow-up in the case cohorts was 10 years, with BCs diagnosed through June 2022. Additional validation was performed in EMBED with 3-year follow-up. An AI risk model was developed in Sweden, and we report independent validation in Olmsted/KARMA/EMBED. Absolute 10-year risks were estimated at study entry. Time-dependent discriminatory performance [AUC( t )] and expected-to-observed events (E/O) were estimated. Comparisons were performed with clinical risk tools and the image-based Mirai tool. Across Olmsted/KARMA, 8696 individuals (mean age, 54.4±10.6) and 1633 individuals with incident BC (mean age, 57.0±10.6) were included. Average 10-year risks were 3.83 and 3.14%, and E/O ratios were 0.99 and 0.99. Ten-year AUC( t ) for invasive BCs were 0.72 in Olmsted and 0.72 in KARMA. Similar discriminatory results were observed in EMBED. Our AI risk tool performed significantly better than Mirai in Olmsted/KARMA/EMBED. In KARMA, in the top 10% of high-risk individuals, the AI risk tool predicted 33% of BCs compared with 23%/20%/24% predicted by Tyrer-Cuzick-v8/BCSC-v3/Mirai (all P < 0.01). The 10-year image-derived AI risk model showed significantly higher performance than clinical risk models and Mirai in diverse populations, supporting its clinical potential for primary prevention.

Abstract Context Prior reports of plasma estradiol concentrations and their reference ranges in postmenopausal women identified marked variation, in part due to assay method and body mass index (BMI). Objective To develop an international reference range for plasma estradiol in postmenopausal women, support accurate assessment of concentrations during systemic and local (eg, vaginal) estradiol therapy, and improve risk prediction for diseases, including osteoporosis, breast, and endometrial cancers. Methodology Estradiol concentrations were measured using primarily liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assays in 5 international cohorts of community-dwelling, postmenopausal women of primarily European ancestry aged 38-100 years who were not using exogenous estrogens (n = 7206). Measurements were harmonized to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reference measurement procedure (RMP) by re-assaying a subset of samples for each cohort and generating recalibration equations. Reference intervals were determined for all women, non-obese women, and specific BMI categories. Results Estradiol concentrations from separate LC-MS/MS assays correlated closely with the CDC RMP, and harmonization minimized inter-assay variability. Estradiol concentrations correlated with BMI but not with chronological age. The reference range (2.5th-97.5th percentile) was 1.1-18.2 pg/mL (4.0-66.8 pmol/L) with median of 4.9 pg/mL (18.0 pmol/L) for all postmenopausal women and 1.1-12.5 pg/mL (4.0-45.9 pmol/L) with median of 4.1 pg/mL (15.1 pmol/L) for non-obese women (BMI &lt; 30). Reference ranges increased progressively with higher BMI categories. Conclusion Cross-calibration of estradiol measurements with the CDC RP enabled the development of harmonized plasma estradiol reference ranges for postmenopausal women who were not using exogenous estrogens, suitable for future studies to establish clinical utility. Increasing obesity in postmenopausal women was associated with increasing estradiol concentration and BMI category-specific reference ranges.

Abstract Background. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 35 genetic susceptibility single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for multiple myeloma (MM) in individuals of European ancestry (EA) and shown strong genetic correlation between MM and its precursor, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). We evaluate the contribution of the 35 MM variants to MGUS susceptibility overall and by prognostic subgroups. Methods. The study included 20,756 participants (14,486 controls, 1,883 with MGUS, and 2,163 with MM) from the Mayo Clinic. Logistic regression assuming an additive model estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for individual SNPs and for the MM-PRS, adjusted for age, sex, study, and principal components. The PRS was a weighted sum of 35 SNPs with effect estimates from the largest MM GWAS and was modeled continuously (per SD) and by quintiles (Q1-Q5). SNPnexus annotated variants that replicated in MGUS (P &lt; 0.05 and OR &gt; 1.01) versus those that did not (P &gt; 0.05 and OR &lt; 1.01). Results. The 35-SNP MM-PRS was strongly associated with MM risk and modestly with MGUS. Compared with the middle quintile (Q3), MM odds rose from OR=0.55 (CI=0.46-0.65, P=2.2e-11) in Q1 to OR = 1.82 (CI=1.59-2.09, P=6.2e-18) in Q5. MGUS showed a similar, attenuated pattern (Q1 OR = 0.74, CI=0.64-0.84, P=6.4e-6 / Q5 OR=1.36, CI=1.21-1.53, P=3.4e-7). Each SD increase in PRS corresponded to OR=1.52 (CI=1.45-1.59, P=1.3e-66) for MM and OR = 1.22 (CI=1.18-1.27, P=1.0e-23) for MGUS. Higher PRS values were linked to larger M-protein ((0.1-1.5 g/dL: OR=1.40, CI=1.18-1.65, P=5.8e-12) vs &lt;0.1 g/dL: OR = 1.19, CI=1.13-1.24, P=5.8e-12)) and abnormal free light chain (FLC) ratio ((OR = 1.33, CI=1.21-1.46, P=1.0e-9) vs normal ratio (OR=1.19, CI=1.14-1.25, P=1.4e-13)). Ten risk loci replicated in MGUS, mapping to genes involved in plasma-cell function, immune regulation, and DNA repair and enriched for Rho GTPase signaling, NF-κB-mediated apoptosis, and RNA polymerase II transcription, implicating early plasma-cell activation and transcriptional control. The 12 non-replicating loci, including PHC3, ATG5, and NFIC, mapped to genes involved in chromatin remodeling, autophagy, and SUMOylation, suggesting roles in stress response and genomic maintenance. Conclusions. The MM-PRS captures shared heritability between MM and MGUS and correlates with MGUS subtype and severity. Replicating variants highlight immune and cell-cycle pathways relevant to MGUS onset, whereas non-replicating loci cluster in DNA-repair and stress-response processes, underscoring their potential role in progression. Citation Format: Alyssa Ione Clay-Gilmour, Angelica Macauda, Cristine Allmer, Danelle Moonen, Aaron D. Norman, Nicholas Boddicker, Janet E. Olson, Elizabeth E. Brown, Vincent S. Rajkumar, Esteban Braggio, David Murray, Susan Slager, Shaji Kunnathu Kumar, Celine Vachon. Implications of multiple myeloma polygenic risk scores (PRS) for MGUS [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 3603.

Abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI)–based, mammography breast cancer risk prediction models show improved discriminatory accuracy relative to clinical risk models. However, data on their calibration are limited. This study compared model performance of 3 clinical breast cancer risk models: Gail, Tyrer–Cuzick v8, and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium v3 with the MIRAI AI-risk model. Methods Digital mammograms were ascertained from a screening mammography cohort of 12 308 women within the Mayo Clinic Biobank with 250 incident breast cancers (176 invasive) within 5 years. We predicted 5-year breast cancer risk, estimated discriminatory accuracy (C-index), and calibration (observed-to-expected ratio) of both overall and invasive breast cancer and compared estimates using bootstrapping approaches. Results MIRAI demonstrated similar or improved discriminatory accuracy of overall breast cancer (C-index = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 0.74) and invasive breast cancer (C-index = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.75) compared with clinical models (overall breast cancer: C-index = 0.59-0.68; invasive breast cancer: C-index = 0.60-0.68). MIRAI’s calibration for risk of overall breast cancer (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.08) was improved compared with Gail (observed-to-expected ratio = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.38) and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (observed-to-expected ratio = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.56) but similar to TC with volumetric percent density and polygenic risk score (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.87 to 1.13). However, for low-risk women (approximately 50%), MIRAI overestimated risk of overall breast cancer. MIRAI also overestimated risk of invasive breast cancer across the risk spectrum (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.58 to 0.78), whereas clinical models had good calibration (observed-to-expected ratio = 0.86–0.99). Conclusion MIRAI demonstrated stronger discriminatory accuracy than clinical models for 5-year overall and invasive breast cancer risk prediction but overestimated risk for both breast cancer endpoints. AI-based risk models should consider discriminatory accuracy and calibration for invasive cancer before implementation.

ABSTRACT Introduction Breast cancer remains a leading cause of death among Latinas. Although breast cancer risk assessment models exist and show promise in reducing mortality, few studies have elicited women's interest in and perceptions around breast cancer risk assessment, particularly among underserved populations, like Latinas, who are susceptible to disparities in breast cancer outcomes. These disparities stem from factors such as limited access to healthcare services, lower rates of screening utilization, language barriers, and socioeconomic challenges, all of which compound their risk and hinder effective engagement with risk assessment tools. This qualitative study aims to explore Latinas' perspectives regarding breast cancer risk assessment and implications on future behaviors. Methods Twenty‐three under‐ or uninsured Latinas aged 45–65 with no personal history of breast cancer took part in either a focus group ( n = 3, 15 participants) or individual interviews (8 participants). Guided by health behavior theories (Theory of Planned Behavior and Health Belief Model), data were transcribed, translated, and analyzed using a deductive‐inductive approach to thematic content analysis, resulting in four themes. Results Latinas expressed high interest in knowing their breast cancer risk and reported that the benefits of knowing one's risk outweighed the harms. Latinas also stated that they would continue screening as recommended if found to be at low risk, but that they would speak with their provider or increase screening frequency if found to be at increased risk. Moreover, Latinas described the pivotal role of providers and social networks in influencing interest and perceptions around breast cancer risk assessment and preventive behaviors. Conclusion Underserved Latinas viewed breast cancer risk assessment positively and underscored the need for multilevel, culturally tailored strategies to improve breast cancer risk assessment. This study yielded four distinct themes: (1) Interest and Awareness of Personal Breast Cancer Risk, (2) Benefits and Barriers of Knowing Personal Breast Cancer Risk, (3) Screening Implications of Knowing Personal Breast Cancer Risk, and (4) Provider Influence on Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Behaviors. Potential strategies include efforts to improve provider engagement and communication and leveraging social networks to increase awareness and encourage preventive behaviors. Trial Registration NCI‐2023‐00465

PURPOSE This national study was undertaken to determine screening mammography rates among transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals. METHODS TGD individuals and cisgender women who qualified to receive screening mammography based on American College of Radiology guidelines were identified in the longitudinal OptumLabs Data Warehouse. The primary end point was the percentage of patients who had high rates of screening (>75% recommended screenings). Multivariable analyses were conducted in a matched population of transgender men to cisgender women to identify and adjust for factors associated with high adherence. Individuals were matched at a 1:4 ratio (transgender men: cisgender women) on age, race/ethnicity, year of enrollment in their health care plan, and duration of follow-up. RESULTS This study focused on 10,478 TGD individuals (3,778 transgender men; 1,294 transgender women; 5,406 with gender dysphoria not meeting other TGD criteria, NMOT) and 6,218,369 cisgender women. For transgender men, transgender women, individuals with gender dysphoria NMOT, and cisgender women, high mammography rates were observed in 41.1% (95% CI, 39.5 to 42.6), 7.4% (95% CI, 6.0 to 8.8), 11.9% (95% CI, 11.0 to 12.7), and 38.3% (95% CI, 38.3 to 38.4), respectively ( P < .0001). When transgender men were compared with 15,112 matched cisgender women, an age-based differential association was observed between sex and high mammography rates (interaction P = .0003); compared with cisgender women, transgender men appeared more likely to manifest high rates of screening at age 40-49 years (odds ratios [ORs], 1.38 [95% CI, 1.28 to 1.50]; P < .0001) and 50-59 years (OR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81]; P < .0001) but not in the older age groups. CONCLUSION The relatively high rates of screening mammography in cisgender women and transgender men suggest clinicians are offering mammography to individuals who are at average or high breast cancer risk, as compared with cisgender women, and not to transgender women at low risk.

Abstract Background: Incorporation of Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) can refine traditional breast cancer (BC) risk assessment models to provide precise estimates of BC risk. However, the impact of such an integrated model on BC risk estimates and clinical decision-making related to BC screening and preventive strategies in germline pathogenic variant (PV) carriers is not fully understood. Methods: The GENRE-2 is a prospective single-arm multisite clinical trial (NCT04474834) incorporating 313-PRS into standard BC risk assessment models to determine the impact of PRS on risk estimates and clinical decisions on prevention and screening. All women received pre- and post-PRS BC risk estimates and completed surveys on their screening and cancer prevention decisions before and after integrating PRS estimates. Herein, we report on the impact of integrating PRS into CanRisk-based BC risk estimates among women enrolled in GENRE-2 due to PVs in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, or PALB2. Women were categorized into average risk (&lt;20%), moderate risk (20-40%), or high risk (&gt;40%) for BC based on clinically relevant lifetime risk thresholds for supplemental MRI screening and risk-reducing bilateral mastectomies. Changes in categories of lifetime BC risk estimates were then evaluated before and after integration of PRS. Impact of PRS on patient decisions to undertake screening or preventive action (medication or prophylactic mastectomy) was evaluated based on pre- and post-PRS surveys. Results: Between 2020 and 2025, 933 women were enrolled, 633 received PRS results and completed a survey to date. Of those who received PRS results, 214 (33.8%) were PV carriers (ATM: 24, BRCA1: 54, BRCA2: 73, CHEK2: 54 and PALB2: 9). Among PV carriers, the CanRisk-based median 10-year and lifetime pre-PRS risk estimates were 6.0% and 23.9% for ATM, 22.5% and 77.5% for BRCA1, 17.9% and 77.6% for BRCA2, 7.1% and 26.6% for CHEK2, and 16.6% and 42.4% for PALB2, respectively. A total of 7 (29.2%) ATM PV carriers had a shift in lifetime BC risk categories after integration of PRS, with 1 (4.2%) shifting from average to moderate-risk, 3 (12.5%) shifting from moderate to average-risk category, and 3 (12.5%) shifting from moderate to high-risk category. Among CHEK2 PV carriers, 9 (16.7%) had a shift in lifetime risk categories, with 4 (7.4%) shifting from moderate to average-risk, 2 (3.7%) shifting from moderate to high-risk, and 3 (5.6%) shifting from high to moderate-risk. None of the BRCA1 and 4.1% of BRCA2 PV carriers had a shift in lifetime risk categories after PRS integration. Only 1 (11.1%) PALB2 PV carrier had a change in lifetime risk category after integration of PRS, although this was limited by a small sample. A significantly higher proportion of PV carriers with a high lifetime risk intended to take preventative action compared to the PV carriers with average lifetime risk (41.4% vs. 20.0%, p=0.007). Conclusions: Integration of PRS into BC lifetime risk estimates led to a clinically meaningful change in risk categories in 29.2% of ATM PV carriers and 16.7% of CHEK2 PV carriers, but in &lt;5% of BRCA1 or BRCA2 PV carriers. These findings suggest that PRS may be helpful for BC risk stratification in moderate-risk genes such as ATM and CHEK2 but may have limited clinical utility in high-risk genes such as BRCA1 or BRCA2. Citation Format: S. Yadav, C. Klassen, D. Stan, J. Fraker, S. Sahni, S. A. Khan, L. Khatri, C. Vachon, D. Schaid, J. P. Sinnwell, E. Carlson, L. Hasadsri, F. J. Couch, S. Pruthi. Impact of Polygenic Risk Scores on Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Clinical Decision Making in Carriers of Germline Pathogenic Variants in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and PALB2: Results from the Prospective Multisite GENRE-2 Clinical Trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-04.

Abstract Background There is growing interest in artificial intelligence (AI) models for predicting future breast cancer. We performed a systematic review of studies of mammography-based AI models for future breast cancer risk prediction to summarize current evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and inform future research directions. Methods We searched 6 databases for studies from January 1, 2012, to February 28, 2025, that evaluated mammography-based AI models for future breast cancer risk prediction. We extracted study design, participants’ race and ethnicity, geographic origin, mammogram type, vendor, prediction time frame, breast cancer type predicted, external validation, and exclusion of cancers diagnosed on the index screening mammogram. Areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs) were summarized overall and by study characteristics. Results A total of 41 studies met our inclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective, and most used 2D mammograms (n = 37 studies) acquired using Hologic equipment (n = 25) and performed in the United States (n = 17); White, non-Hispanic women were most represented. Nearly all (n = 40) studies assessed discrimination performance with a median AUC of 0.71 for no longer than 2-year risk prediction, 0.72 for 3-4 years, and 0.71 for 5 years or more prediction. Median AUC was 0.75 for studies including index cancers vs 0.68 when excluded. Six studies reported model calibration performance ranging from good to overestimation of risk. Conclusion Future studies should evaluate models using digital breast tomosynthesis, examine performance for aggressive or advanced breast cancer, include diverse populations, and evaluate both discrimination and model calibration. Prospective evaluations are needed to determine the clinical utility of mammography-based AI models for personalized risk-based breast cancer screening before implementation.