ArticlePLoS medicine2013
Risk prediction for breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer in white women aged 50 y or older: derivation and validation from population-based cohort studies.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 95 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Uterine Cancer Risk Reducing Strategies in Postmenopausal Women
Non-Invasive Strategies for Early Detection of Uterine Cancer in Patients With Abnormal Uterine Bleeding
Who cites it
95 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Insights and limitations of endometrial cancer risk prediction models for clinical applicability: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of prediction models for risk of breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding the contribution of lifestyle in breast cancer risk prediction: a systematic review of models applicable to Europe.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Cumulative evidence for relationships between multiple variants of HNF1B and the risk of prostate and endometrial cancers.BMC medical genetics · 2018Pooled it
- Current Study of Alpha-Mangostin in Breast Cancer Therapy: Antioxidant Mechanisms and Redox Modulation from In Silico to In Vivo Studies.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Global burden trends and menopause timing associations for gynecological and breast cancers in postmenopausal women.iScience · 2026Article
- Improving ovarian cancer risk assessment using a machine learning model developed on data from the Prostate Lung Colorectal Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2026Article
- Insulin resistance as a modifiable contributor to breast cancer: mechanisms, biomarkers, and therapeutic implications.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- Risk of endometrial cancer among breast cancer survivors in Japan: a matched cohort study.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
- Exogenous Hormones, Tumor Intrinsic Subtypes, and Breast Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Warning factors of metachronous uterine cancer in patients with breast cancer: a real-world nationwide cohort study.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Ovarian cancer risk prediction: a clinical epidemiology perspective.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Association ofTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2025Article
- Breast cancer: pathogenesis and treatments.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Models for predicting risk of endometrial cancer: a systematic review.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Article
- A Promising Druggable Target for Translational Therapy of Ovarian Cancer: A Molecular Profiling of Therapeutic Innovations, Extracellular Vesicle Acquired Resistance, and Signaling Pathways.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- Obesity Is an Independent Prognostic Factor That Reduced Pathological Complete Response in Operable Breast Cancer Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Mortality Prediction Modeling for Patients with Breast Cancer Based on Explainable Machine Learning.Cancers · 2024Article
- Estimating sojourn time and sensitivity of screening for ovarian cancer using a Bayesian framework.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- Global, regional, and national burden of female cancers in women of child-bearing age, 1990-2021: analysis of data from the global burden of disease study 2021.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers share some hormonal and epidemiologic risk factors. While several models predict absolute risk of breast cancer, there are few models for ovarian cancer in the general population, and none for endometrial cancer. METHODS AND
findingsUsing data on white, non-Hispanic women aged 50+ y from two large population-based cohorts (the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial [PLCO] and the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study [NIH-AARP]), we estimated relative and attributable risks and combined them with age-specific US-population incidence and competing mortality rates. All models included parity. The breast cancer model additionally included estrogen and progestin menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use, other MHT use, age at first live birth, menopausal status, age at menopause, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, benign breast disease/biopsies, alcohol consumption, and body mass index (BMI); the endometrial model included menopausal status, age at menopause, BMI, smoking, oral contraceptive use, MHT use, and an interaction term between BMI and MHT use; the ovarian model included oral contraceptive use, MHT use, and family history or breast or ovarian cancer. In independent validation data (Nurses' Health Study cohort) the breast and ovarian cancer models were well calibrated; expected to observed cancer ratios were 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-1.04) for breast cancer and 1.08 (95% CI: 0.97-1.19) for ovarian cancer. The number of endometrial cancers was significantly overestimated, expected/observed = 1.20 (95% CI: 1.11-1.29). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs; discriminatory power) were 0.58 (95% CI: 0.57-0.59), 0.59 (95% CI: 0.56-0.63), and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.66-0.70) for the breast, ovarian, and endometrial models, respectively.
conclusionsThese models predict absolute risks for breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers from easily obtainable risk factors and may assist in clinical decision-making. Limitations are the modest discriminatory ability of the breast and ovarian models and that these models may not generalize to women of other races. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
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.