ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2011
No evidence of excess breast cancer risk among mutation-negative women from BRCA mutation-positive families.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breast and Ovarian Cancer Among Individuals Undergoing BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of BRCA 1/2 Genetic Test and Preventive Strategies: Using Real-World Data From an Upper-Middle Income Country.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Risks of breast or ovarian cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 predictive test negatives: findings from the EMBRACE study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2018Article
- Can chimerism explain breast/ovarian cancers in BRCA non-carriers from BRCA-positive families?PloS one · 2018Article
- No evidence of excessive cancer screening in female noncarriers fromCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2017Article
- Analysis of chromosomal radiosensitivity of healthy BRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers in BRCA families with the G2 micronucleus assay.Oncology reports · 2017Article
- Article
- Incorporating truncating variants in PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM into the BOADICEA breast cancer risk model.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Article
- No evidence of increased breast cancer risk for proven noncarriers from BRCA1 and BRCA2 families.Familial cancer · 2016Article
- BRCA1 Circos: a visualisation resource for functional analysis of missense variants.Journal of medical genetics · 2015Article
- Comparison of the screening practices of unaffected noncarriers under 40 and between 40 and 49 in BRCA1/2 families.Journal of genetic counseling · 2013Article
- Evidence that BRCA1- or BRCA2-associated cancers are not inevitable.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2012Article
- Colorectal and other cancer risks for carriers and noncarriers from families with a DNA mismatch repair gene mutation: a prospective cohort study.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2012Article
- Breast cancer risk for noncarriers of family-specific BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: findings from the Breast Cancer Family Registry.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2011Article
- Breast and ovarian cancer screening of non-carriers from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families: 2-year follow-up of cohorts from France and Quebec.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This analysis addresses risk of breast cancer among women in BRCA-positive families who test negative for the family mutation. We compared the number of prospectively diagnosed breast cancers in 395 mutation-negative women from 28 BRCA1/2-positive families to an age-, race-, and calendar time-specific expected number of breast cancers derived from the SEER 9 Cancer Registry. Study participants contributed a total of 7008.1 person-years of follow-up. The mean age at study entry was 31.3 years; mean follow-up was 17.7 years. Ten women developed breast cancer yielding an observed-to-expected ratio of 0.82 (95% CI 0.39-1.51). Adjustment for possible reduction in breast cancer risk due to oophorectomy by two different methods resulted in O/E ratios in the range of 0.80-0.99. Stratification by degree of relatedness to the nearest mutation carrier did not substantially alter these results, however, women with at least one-first degree relative with breast cancer appeared to have a slightly increased, though not statistically significant, risk of breast cancer (O/E ratio = 1.33, 95% CI 0.41-2.91). Our data suggest that breast cancer risk among mutation-negative women from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families is similar to that observed in the general population, with a possible slight increase in risk among mutation-negative women with a family history of breast cancer in a first degree relative. Although this is the largest prospective cohort yet assembled to address this important question, the number of breast cancer events is still relatively small.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.