Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25373702›Full record

ArticleFamilial cancer2015

Estimate of the penetrance of BRCA mutation and the COS software for the assessment of BRCA mutation probability.

Jacopo Berrino, Franco Berrino, Silvia Francisci, Bernard Peissel, Jacopo Azzollini, Valeria Pensotti, Paolo Radice, Patrizia Pasanisi, Siranoush Manoukian

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Familial cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Analysis ofCancers · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jacopo BerrinoDepartment of Preventive and Predictive Medicine, Fondazione IRCSS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Franco Berrino
Silvia Francisci
Bernard Peissel
Jacopo Azzollini
Valeria Pensotti
Paolo Radice
Patrizia Pasanisi
Siranoush Manoukian
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITFIRC Institute of Molecular Oncology · ITIstituto Superiore di Sanità · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We have designed the user-friendly COS software with the intent to improve estimation of the probability of a family carrying a deleterious BRCA gene mutation. The COS software is similar to the widely-used Bayesian-based BRCAPRO software, but it incorporates improved assumptions on cancer incidence in women with and without a deleterious mutation, takes into account relatives up to the fourth degree and allows researchers to consider an hypothetical third gene or a polygenic model of inheritance. Since breast cancer incidence and penetrance increase over generations, we estimated birth-cohort-specific incidence and penetrance curves. We estimated breast and ovarian cancer penetrance in 384 BRCA1 and 229 BRCA2 mutated families. We tested the COS performance in 436 Italian breast/ovarian cancer families including 79 with BRCA1 and 27 with BRCA2 mutations. The area under receiver operator curve (AUROC) was 84.4 %. The best probability threshold for offering the test was 22.9 %, with sensitivity 80.2 % and specificity 80.3 %. Notwithstanding very different assumptions, COS results were similar to BRCAPRO v6.0.

Indexed as

Genes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2MutationSoftwareArea Under CurveBayes TheoremBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingHumansOvarian NeoplasmsPenetranceROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID25373702
OpenAlexW2002360588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.