ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2015
Assessing absolute changes in breast cancer risk due to modifiable risk factors.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Calculating Future 10-Year Breast Cancer Risks in Risk-Adapted Surveillance: A Method Comparison and Application in Clinical Practice.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Article
- Modifiable Barriers and Facilitators for Breast Cancer Care: A Thematic Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives.The Journal of surgical research · 2023Article
- The Steroid Metabolome and Breast Cancer Risk in Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer: The Novel Role of Adrenal Androgens and Glucocorticoids.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Article
- Circulating growth factor concentrations and breast cancer risk: a nested case-control study of IGF-1, IGFBP-3, and breast cancer in a family-based cohort.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2020Article
- Recreational Physical Activity Is Associated with Reduced Breast Cancer Risk in Adult Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer: A Cohort Study of Women Selected for Familial and Genetic Risk.Cancer research · 2020Article
- Alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, and familial breast cancer risk: findings from the Prospective Family Study Cohort (ProF-SC).Breast cancer research : BCR · 2019Article
- Clinicians' use of breast cancer risk assessment tools according to their perceived importance of breast cancer risk factors: an international survey.Journal of community genetics · 2019Article
- Age-specific breast cancer risk by body mass index and familial risk: prospective family study cohort (ProF-SC).Breast cancer research : BCR · 2018Article
- Modifiable Lifestyle Factors: Opportunities for (Hereditary) Breast Cancer Prevention - a Narrative Review.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Breast cancer trends differ by ethnicity: a report from the South African National Cancer Registry (1994-2009).European journal of public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical risk assessment involves absolute risk measures, but information on modifying risk and preventing cancer is often communicated in relative terms. To illustrate the potential impact of risk factor modification in model-based risk assessment, we evaluated the performance of the IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool, with and without current body mass index (BMI), for predicting future breast cancer occurrence in a prospective cohort of 665 postmenopausal women. Overall, IBIS's accuracy (overall agreement between observed and assigned risks) and discrimination (AUC concordance between assigned risks and outcomes) were similar with and without the BMI information. However, in women with BMI > 25 kg/m(2), adding BMI information improved discrimination (AUC = 63.9 % and 61.4 % with and without BMI, P < 0.001). The model-assigned 10-year risk difference for a woman with high (27 kg/m(2)) versus low (21 kg/m(2)) BMI was only 0.3 % for a woman with neither affected first-degree relatives nor BRCA1 mutation, compared to 4.5 % for a mutation carrier with three such relatives. This contrast illustrates the value of using information on modifiable risk factors in risk assessment and in sharing information with patients of their absolute risks with and without modifiable risk factors.
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.