Citations

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 Pancreatic cancer disproportionately affects Black individuals in the United States, but they have limited representation in genetic studies of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). To address this gap, we performed admixture mapping and genome-wide association analysis (GWAS) in genetically inferred African ancestry individuals (1,030 cases and 889 controls). Admixture mapping identified three regions with a significantly higher proportion of African ancestry in cases compared to controls (5q33.3, 10p1, 22q12.3). GWAS identified a genome-wide significant association at 5p15.33 ( CLPTM1L , rs383009:T>C, T Allele Frequency=0.51, OR:1.45, P value=1.24×10 -8 ), a locus previously associated with PDAC. Known loci at 5p15.33, 7q32.3, 8q24.21 and 7q25.1 also replicated (P value <0.01). Multi-ancestral fine-mapping identified two potential causal SNPs (rs3830069 and rs2735940) at 5p15.33. Collectively these findings identified novel PDAC risk loci and expanded our understanding of this deadly cancer in underrepresented populations, emphasizing the multifactorial nature of PDAC risk including inherited genetic and non-genetic factors. Statement of Significance To understand how genetic variation contributes to PDAC risk in Black people in North American, we studied individuals of genetically-inferred African ancestry. We identified novel risk loci and differences in the contribution of known loci. This demonstrates that ancestry-informed genetic analyses improve our understanding of PDAC risk and enhances discovery.

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI)-scores estimated from digital mammograms predict future breast cancer (BC) risk. MIRAI is a deep learning BC risk model that provides a continuous 5-year risk of overall BC from four screening full field digital mammograms. Common germline genetic variation in the form of a polygenic risk score (BC-PRS) is associated with increased BC risk and may improve MIRAI’s 5-year risk prediction. Our goal was to develop an updated MIRAI 5-year risk model that incorporates the BC-PRS (MIRAI+PRS) and to evaluate its discriminatory accuracy and calibration for both overall and invasive BC compared to MIRAI alone. We developed the MIRAI+PRS model by multiplying each woman’s 5-year MIRAI risk estimate by their relative risk based on their BC-PRS relative to the population mean. We evaluated the models within the Mayo Clinic Biobank mammography cohort, comprised of 12,307 women without a prior history of BC; 176 invasive and 250 overall BC were diagnosed within 5 years. MIRAI was estimated on screening mammograms closest to enrollment but at least 6 months prior to BC. Discriminatory accuracy, assessed by C-statistic, was high and similar for MIRAI+PRS vs. MIRAI models, for overall BC and invasive BC (Table). Calibration assessed by observed to expected (O/E) ratios was also similar for MIRAI+PRS compared to MIRAI predictions for BC outcomes (Table), although there was improvement in decile-specific O/E ratios across the lowest risk deciles (&lt;1.67%) for MIRAI+PRS. Calibration for invasive cancer was poor for MIRAI with or without PRS. In summary, the MIRAI+PRS risk model did not result in significant difference of discriminatory accuracy or overall calibration compared to the MIRAI model, but there was evidence for improved calibration for women with 5-year risk below 1.67%. For invasive BC, the model had poor calibration regardless of whether PRS was included, underscoring the importance of training AI models for BC outcomes that are associated with a clinical intervention. Citation Format: Christopher G. Scott, Peter Kraft, Imon Banerjee, Ramon Correa Medero, Aaron D. Norman, Fergus J. Couch, Karla Kerlikowske, Stacey J. Winham, Celine M. Vachon. Development and evaluation of a MIRAI 5-year risk model with a breast cancer polygenic risk score [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 2779.

Abstract Background The associations between different types of diabetes, characterized by distinct pathophysiology and genetic architecture, and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) risk are not understood. Methods We investigated associations of genetic susceptibility to type 2 diabetes (T2D), 8 T2D mechanistic clusters, type 1 diabetes (T1D), and maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) with PDAC risk. We used genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary-level statistics for T2D (242 283 cases, 1 569 734 controls), T1D (18 942 cases, 501 638 controls), and PDAC (10 244 cases and 360 535 controls) in individuals of European ancestry. Results Two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) using the Robust Adjusted Profile Score (MR-RAPS) method indicated that genetically predicted T2D was associated with PDAC risk (OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.15), particularly the T2D obesity (OR = 1.28; 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.42) and lipodystrophy (OR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.51) clusters. No association was observed for T1D with PDAC risk (OR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.02). Pathway/gene-set analysis using the summary-based Adaptive Rank Truncated Product (sARTP) method revealed a significant association between the MODY gene-sets and PDAC risk (P = 1.5 × 10−8), which remained after excluding 20 known PDAC GWAS loci (P = 7.6 × 10−4). HNF1A, FOXA3, and HNF4A were the top contributing genes after excluding the previously identified GWAS loci regions. Conclusions Our results from this genetic association study support that T2D, particularly the obesity and lipodystrophy mechanistic clusters, and MODY genomic susceptibility regions play a role in the etiology of PDAC.

Background: Breast cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) and traditional risk models (e.g., the Gail model [Gail]) are known to contribute largely independent information, but it is unclear how the overlap varies by ancestry, age, disease type (invasive breast cancer, DCIS), and risk threshold. Methods: In a retrospective case–control study, we evaluated risk prediction performance in 180,398 women (161,849 of European ancestry; 18,549 of Asian ancestry). Odds ratios (ORs) from logistic regression models and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were estimated. Results: PRS for invasive disease showed a stronger association in younger (<50 years) women (OR = 2.51, AUC = 0.622) than in women ≥ 50 years (OR = 2.06, AUC = 0.653) of European ancestry. PRS performance in Asians was lower (OR range = 1.62–1.64, AUC = 0.551–0.600). Gail performance was modest across groups and poor in younger Asian women (OR = 0.94–0.99, AUC = 0.523–0.533). Age interactions were observed for both PRS (p < 0.001) and Gail (p < 0.001) in Europeans, whereas in Asians, age interaction was observed only for Gail (invasive: p < 0.001; DCIS: p = 0.002). PRS identified more high-risk individuals than Gail in Asian populations, especially ≥50 years, while Gail identified more in Europeans. Overlap between PRS, Gail, and family history was limited at higher thresholds. Calibration analysis, comparing empirical and model-based ROC curves, showed divergence for both PRS and Gail (p < 0.001), which indicates miscalibration. In Europeans, family history and prior biopsies drove Gail discrimination. In younger Asians, age at first live birth was influential. Conclusions: PRS adds value to risk stratification beyond traditional tools, especially in younger women and Asian ancestry populations.

Importance Inherited pathogenic variants (PVs) in known predisposition genes can greatly increase breast cancer risk, but the combined impact of PV status, family history, and other factors on breast cancer risk in the general US population has not been well described. Objective To evaluate population-based breast cancer risk estimates for those with established PVs overall and stratified by first-degree family history of breast cancer and other factors. Design, Setting, and Participants This study used pooled data from 13 US-based breast cancer case-control studies participating in the Cancer Risk Estimates Related to Susceptibility (CARRIERS) consortium. Enrollment for individual studies occurred between 1976 and 2013, and results are based on data released March 2023, with analyses conducted from June 2022 to July 2025. Exposures PVs, breast cancer family history, self-reported race and ethnicity, and established risk factors. Main Outcomes and Measures Breast cancer rate ratios for PVs in 7 genes were estimated from the CARRIERS consortium. PV status and incidence and mortality statistics were combined using the Individualized Coherent Absolute Risk Estimation (iCARE) model to estimate conditional cumulative breast cancer risks and 95% CIs, stratified by family history and standardized to the US population. Models that incorporated population-based data and published estimates for established epidemiologic risk factors were also evaluated. Results A total of 67 692 women were studied, including 33 841 who were diagnosed with breast cancer. PVs in ATM , BRCA1 , BRCA2 , CHEK2 , and PALB2 were strongly associated with breast cancer risk, with BRCA1 and PALB2 PVs showing evidence of heterogeneity by family history. In models considering PVs, family history, and established risk factors, the estimated cumulative risks of breast cancer by age 50 years ranged from 2.4% (95% CI, 2.4-2.4) in women with no PVs and no family history to 35.5% (95% CI, 21.6-55.1) in PALB2 PV carriers with a family history. Among women who have not been diagnosed with breast cancer by age 50 years, the cumulative risk of breast cancer by age 80 years ranged from 11.1% (95% CI, 11.0-11.2) in noncarriers with no family history to 70.5% (95% CI, 52.8-83.5) for PALB2 carriers with a family history. PV-specific cumulative risk estimates varied across subgroups defined by race and ethnicity and potentially modifiable epidemiologic risk factors. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, population-based estimates of cumulative breast cancer risk for established PVs, as informed by the CARRIERS case-control sample, varied by family history and potentially modifiable risk factors. These estimates provide guidance for identifying individuals who will most benefit from enhanced screening and prevention strategies.

Abstract Background Breast cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified more than 200 susceptibility loci, but most studies are dominated by European and East Asian populations. Methods We analyzed breast cancer GWAS summary statistics from African (AFR), East Asian (EAS), European (EUR), and Hispanic/Latina (H/L) samples (159,297 cases and 212,102 controls). We estimated logit-scale SNP-based heritability, polygenicity, and cross-ancestry genetic correlation, partitioned heritability across functional annotations, and integrated GWAS results with the Tabula Sapiens single-cell atlas using scDRS+. Results The logit-scale heritability of breast cancer ranged from ℎ 2 =0.47 (SE = 0.07) in EAS to AFR ℎ 2 =0.61 (SE = 0.10), with no significant differences across ancestries (p=0.63). The estimated number of susceptibility markers in a sparse normal-mixture effects model also varied from 4,446 (SE = 3,100) in EAS to 8,308 (SE = 2,751) in AFR, but differences were not significant across ancestries (p=0.55). Cross-sample genetic correlations varied, with the strongest correlation between EUR and EAS (𝜌 = 0.79, SE = 0.08) and weakest between AFR and H/L (𝜌 = 0.26, SE = 0.24). Regulatory annotations were enriched for breast cancer heritability across samples. Integration with single-cell expression profiles implicated ancestry-shared associations with innate immune, secretory epithelial, and stromal cell types. Conclusion These results indicate substantial cross-ancestry sharing of breast cancer polygenic architecture, highlight a consistent contribution of regulatory variation, and identify convergent cellular contexts that motivate functional follow-up and inform expectations for the transferability and attainable performance of common-variant risk prediction across populations.

ImportanceEtiologic heterogeneity in breast carcinogenesis needs to be well characterized for targeted prevention. Associations between menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT) and oral contraceptive (OC) use and breast cancer intrinsic-like subtypes are not well understood.ObjectiveTo examine whether exogenous hormone use is differentially associated with breast cancer subtypes and to evaluate heterogeneity by intrinsic-like subtypes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis study pooled data from 31 nested and population-based case-control studies involved in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. The study population included individuals with breast cancer and control participants from 13 case-control studies nested in prospective cohorts (recruited between 1982 and 2011) and 18 population-based case-control studies (recruited between 1990 and 2013). Data analysis was performed in June 2024.ExposureMHT use (estrogen-progestin therapy [EPT] or estrogen-only therapy [ET]) in postmenopausal women and OC use in premenopausal women (never, past use, or current use).Main Outcomes and MeasuresBreast cancer intrinsic-like subtypes (luminal A–like, luminal B–like, luminal B–ERBB2 [formerly HER2 or HER2/neu]-like, ERBB2 enriched–like, or triple-negative) were determined by immunohistochemistry of tumor sections. Polytomous logistic regression was performed to estimate the association between exogenous hormones and risk of breast cancer by intrinsic-like subtypes. Analyses by subtypes were stratified by body mass index (BMI [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared]; healthy weight, 18.5-&amp;lt;25; overweight, 25-&amp;lt;30; or obesity, ≥30).ResultsThis study included 42 269 individuals with breast cancer (11 901 [28.2%] premenopausal and 30 368 [71.8%] postmenopausal; 23 353 [55.2%] had a known intrinsic-like subtype) and 71 072 control participants. The mean (SD) age of all participants was 57.9 (10.9) years. In postmenopausal women, associations between current MHT use (EPT or ET) and breast cancer differed by subtype. Current EPT users with healthy weight were more likely to be diagnosed with luminal A–like (odds ratio [OR], 2.51 [95% CI, 2.26-2.80]) or luminal B–ERBB2-like (OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.61-2.37]) subtypes. These associations were attenuated but remained for individuals with overweight (OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.02-1.92]) or obesity (OR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.01-2.78]). EPT use increased the odds of being diagnosed with luminal B–like tumors solely in women with healthy weight (OR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.17-1.86]). Current ET use was positively associated with luminal A–like disease in women with healthy weight only (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.01-1.32]), showing inverse associations with higher BMI (obesity: OR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.50-0.85]). In premenopausal women, recent OC use was associated with luminal B–ERBB2-like (OR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.09-2.08]), ERBB2 enriched–like (OR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.55-3.51]), and triple-negative (OR, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.33-2.29]; P &amp;lt; .04 for heterogeneity) tumors.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, clear differences were observed in associations between current EPT use and luminal-like breast cancer subtypes and other subtypes. EPT users with healthy weight were more likely to be diagnosed with luminal-like breast cancer compared with nonusers. Subtype heterogeneity was less apparent in associations of OC and ET use. Future studies on contemporary formulations, patterns of use, and routes of administration of exogenous hormone usage are warranted.

Abstract There are limited prospective data on whether established risk factors modify breast cancer risk in women with pathogenic variants (PV) in BRCA1/2 and virtually no risk modification data for ATM, CHEK2, or PALB2. We conducted a nested case–control study in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), randomly selecting women with and without breast cancer for DNA sequencing. We evaluated breast cancer odds associated with obesity, family cancer history, smoking, alcohol, parity, breastfeeding, oophorectomy, tubal ligation, neighborhood socioeconomic status, and menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) with estrogen and progestin or estrogen only in PV carriers and noncarriers. In exploratory analyses, we grouped genes by established predisposition for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive (ATM and CHEK2) or ER-negative (BRCA1 and PALB2) disease. Multivariable models with interaction terms were used to assess differential risk modification by PVs. Among 12,957 WHI participants, 287 carried PVs. Breastfeeding was modestly associated with reduced risk for PALB2 [OR = 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.00–0.92; P value = 0.042]. With one-sided 95% CI, power was sufficient to exclude OR ≥2.0 with obesity for ATM and BRCA2; smoking and alcohol for CHEK2; no breastfeeding for ATM; no oophorectomy for BRCA2 and CHEK2; no tubal ligation for CHEK2; and neighborhood socioeconomic status for all genes. Estrogen + progestin MHT was modestly associated with increased risk for ER-positive PVs (OR = 7.31; 95% CI, 1.14–64.20; P = 0.036). PVs did not modify risk (interaction P ≥ 0.05). BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 PV carriers do not have breast cancer OR ≥2.0 with many established risk factors. However, MHT warrants additional study in PV carriers. Significance: There is limited information on whether established risk factors increase breast cancer risk from PVs. In the WHI, PV carriers had no substantial (≥2-fold) increase with most risk factors, except potentially MHT in ATM or CHEK2 carriers. The results may inform counseling and research on MHT.

Abstract Introduction: Breast cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified over 200 susceptibility loci, many replicated in diverse populations. However, cross-ancestry evaluation of breast cancer genetic architecture remains limited. We examined breast cancer genetic architecture using GWAS summary results from European (EUR; cases (ca) = 188,474, controls (co) = 96,201), East Asian (EAS; ca = 20,393, co = 86,329), African American (AA; ca = 9,235, co = 10,184), and US Hispanic/Latina and Latin American (H/L; ca = 2,396, co =7,468) studies. Methods: GWAS results were derived from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium, the African Ancestry Breast Cancer Genetics Consortium (AABCG), Biobank Japan, and a meta-analysis of five studies of H/L women with breast cancer. Linkage disequilibrium (LD) scores were generated for EUR, EAS, and AMR using the 1000 Genomes Project, while AA LD scores were derived from a subset of AABCG controls. Heritability was estimated for each ancestry group using LD score regression. Genetic correlations between populations were assessed via Popcorn. Polygenicity was analyzed using GENESIS; however, due to the limited sample size in the H/L studies, these estimates were restricted to AA, EAS, and EUR. Enrichment of heritability across regulatory elements was evaluated using stratified LD score regression across all populations. Results: The logit-scale heritability and corresponding standard error (SE) were 0.466 (0.066) for EAS, 0.501 (0.050) for EUR, 0.588 (0.360) for H/L, and 0.614 (0.095) for AA. The estimated number of independent susceptibility loci was 4,446 for EAS, 5,235 for EUR, and 8,308 for AA. Using a clumping and thresholding approach, an optimal set of common variants were projected to explain 38.6% (EUR), 39.4% (EAS), and 26.2% (AA) of genetic variance for samples of 100,000 cases and 100,000 controls with AUCs from corresponding estimated polygenic risk scores (PRSs) of 0.621 (EUR), 0.634 (EAS), and 0.611 (AA). Genetic correlations were strongest between EUR and EAS (ρ = 0.79, SE = 0.08) and EUR and H/L (ρ = 0.68, SE = 0.21), and weakest between AA and EAS (ρ = 0.42, SE = 0.14) and AA and H/L (ρ = 0.26, SE = 0.24). Among 73 genomic features, we found significant (P &lt; 0.05/73) enrichment in heritability in EUR for ‘ancient promoter’ regions, transcription factor binding sites, H3K4me3, ‘super-enhancers’, H3K4me1, H3K27ac; in EAS for ‘super-enhancers’; and in AA for H3K27ac. No genomic features were significantly enriched in H/L, likely due to limited power. Conclusion: These findings suggest a shared breast cancer genetic architecture across diverse populations, as well as the potential for a similar level of breast cancer risk stratification by PRS in these populations. Expanding GWAS in underrepresented populations is essential to improve genetic risk predictions and foster equitable cancer prevention. Citation Format: James L. Li, Maria Zanti, Jacob Williams, Om Jahagirdar, Guochong Jia, Qiang Hu, Jean-Tristan Brandenburg, Li Yan, Weang-Kee Ho, Jingmei Li, José P. Miranda, Devika Godbole, Julie-Alexia Dias, Leila Dorling, Wenlong C. Chen, Nicholas Boddicker, Ying Wang, Alicia Martin, Martin J. Zhang, Yan Zhang, Joe Dennis, Esther M. John, Gabriela Torres-Mejia, Larry Kushi, Jeffrey Weitzel, Susan L. Neuhausen, Luis Carvajal-Carmona, Christopher Haiman, Elad Ziv, Laura Fejerman, Wei Zheng, Dezheng Huo, Douglas Easton, Nilanjan Chatterjee, Peter Kraft, Montserrat Garcia-Closas, Wendy Wong, Kyriaki Michailidou, Qianqian Zhu, Diptavo Dutta, Thomas U. Ahearn, Haoyu Zhang. Genetic architecture of breast cancer across diverse populations: Assessing heritability, genetic correlation, and polygenicity [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 2282.