Next Top Model: An Overview of Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Models CME REVIEW risk for breast cancer as >20%. The BRCAPRO model calculates the pa- tient’s lifetime risk for breast cancer as <20%. Figure 3 depicts the risk assessment values for each model and the factors included in each model. Based on the results of the Tyrer-Cuzick and CanRisk models, the patient is considered high risk. Per NCCN guidelines, they should consider screening mammography and screening MRI 10 years prior to the age of diagnosis of the youngest first-degree relative, but not before age 30. Because the patient’s sister was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 44, screening mammography and screening MRI could have been considered as early as age 34. The patient pursued screening mammography and MRI (Figure 4). The mammogram was normal, with dense breast tissue. Screening MRI demonstrated focal clumped non-mass enhancement in the leſt outer breast. MRI-guided biopsy was performed and revealed DCIS with a microinvasive component. Conclusion Numerous risk assessment models are available to calculate a woman’s lifetime risk of developing and/or carrying a gene mutation that may predispose her to developing breast cancer. Knowledge of risk may help to inform individual screening practices. Risk assessment models have different strengths and weak- nesses that may increase or limit use in certain populations. Further understanding and evaluation of risk assessment models are needed to increase their utilization. Increased breast cancer risk assessment among diverse populations can identify women who may be at high risk for breast cancer. Guideline-based breast cancer screening in these populations serves as an opportuni- ty to address known breast cancer mortality disparities. References 1) Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17-48. 2) Giaquinto AN, Sung H, Miller KD, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(6):524-541. 3) DeSantis CE, Ma J, Gaudet MM, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(6):438-451. 4) Ban KA, Godellas CV. Epidemiology of breast cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2014;23(3):409-422. 5) Monticciolo DL, Malak SF, Friedewald SM, et al. Breast cancer screening recommendations inclusive of all women at average risk: update from the ACR and Society of Breast Imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2021;18(9):1280-1288. 6) Referenced with permission from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Breast Cancer V.4.2023. © National Comprehensive Cancer Network I. All rights reserved. Accessed April 14, 2023. To view the most recent and complete version of the guideline, go online to NCCN.org. 7) Referenced with permission from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction V.1.2022. © National Comprehen- sive Cancer Network I. All rights reserved. Accessed [April 14, 2023]. To view the most recent and complete version of the guideline, go online to NCCN.org. 8) Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Project- ing individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81(24):1879-1886. 9) Baker LH. Breast cancer detection demon- stration project: five-year summary report. CA Cancer J Clin. 1982;32(4):194. 10) Anderson S, Ahnn S, Duff K. NSABP Breast Cancer Prevention Trial risk assessment program, version 2. NSABP Biostatistical Center Technical Report. 1992;12 11) Institute NC. The Breast Cancer Risk As- sessment Tool. Accessed April 14, 2023, https:// bcrisktool.cancer.gov/ 12) Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA. Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and im- plications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(5):358-366. 13) Gail MH. Choosing breast cancer risk models: importance of independent validation. Oxford University Press; 2020. p. 433-435. 14) Wang X, Huang Y, Li L, Dai H, Song F, Chen K. Assessment of performance of the Gail model for predicting breast cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. Breast Cancer Res. 2018;20(1):1-19. 15) Matsuno RK, Costantino JP, Ziegler RG, et al. Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in Asian and Pacific Islander American women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(12):951-961. 16) Banegas MP, John EM, Slattery ML, et al. Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in US Hispanic women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109(2):djw215. 17) Gail MH, Costantino JP, Pee D, et al. Pro- jecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(23):1782-1792. 18) Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004;23(7):1111-1130. 19) Anderson H, Bladström A, Olsson H, Möller TR. Familial breast and ovarian cancer: a Swedish population-based register study. Am J Epidemiol. 2000;152(12):1154-1163. 20) Cuzick J. IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool. 21) IBIS Risk Assessment Tool. 22) Kurian AW, Hughes E, Simmons T, et al. Performance of the IBIS/Tyrer-Cuzick model of breast cancer risk by race and ethnicity in the Women’s Health Initiative. Cancer. 2021;127(20):3742-3750. 23) Brentnall AR, Harkness EF, Astley SM, et al. Mammographic density adds accuracy to both the Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail breast cancer risk models in a prospective UK screening cohort. Breast Cancer Res. 2015;17:1-10. 24) Pal Choudhury P, Brook MN, Hurson AN, et al. Comparative validation of the BOADICEA and Tyrer-Cuzick breast cancer risk models in- corporating classical risk factors and polygenic risk in a population-based prospective cohort of women of European ancestry. Breast Cancer Res. 2021;23:1-5. 25) Boughey JC, Hartmann LC, Anderson SS, et al. Evaluation of the Tyrer-Cuzick (Interna- tional Breast Cancer Intervention Study) model for breast cancer risk prediction in women with atypical hyperplasia. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(22):3591. 26) Lo LL, Milne RL, Liao Y, Cuzick J, Terry MB, Phillips K-A. Validation of the IBIS breast can- cer risk evaluator for women with lobular car- cinoma in-situ. Br J Cancer. 2018;119(1):36-39. 27) Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K. Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: develop- ment and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(5):337-347. 28) Tice JA, Miglioretti DL, Li C-S, Vachon CM, Gard CC, Kerlikowske K. Breast density and benign breast disease: risk assessment to identify women at high risk of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(28):3137. Applied Radiology 14 January / February 2024