ArticleJAMA oncology2018
Use of Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms and Mammographic Density Plus Classic Risk Factors for Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
Article in JAMA oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
83 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 150 citations in OpenAlex.
- How do women who are informed that they are at increased risk of breast cancer appraise their risk? A systematic review of qualitative research.British journal of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Association between interleukin 10 (IL-10) polymorphisms and leishmaniasis progression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Integrating breast cancer polygenic risk scores at scale in the WISDOM Study: a national randomized personalized screening trial.Genome medicine · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Performance of clinical breast cancer risk prediction models vs a mammography-based artificial intelligence risk model.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Performance of an image-only deep learning breast cancer risk model with the addition of a polygenic risk score.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- A Deep Learning Breast Cancer Risk Model for Precise Supplemental Screening.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Review
- Evaluating mammographic density's contribution to improve a breast cancer risk model with questionnaire-based and polygenic factors.NPJ breast cancer · 2025Article
- Polymorphisms in cancer-related genes and their association with breast cancer risk in Iranian women.Molecular biology reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Association between LMTK3 Gene Polymorphism and Breast Cancer Risk in the Indian Population.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Article
- Association of Polygenic-Based Breast Cancer Risk Prediction With Patient Management.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- SNP's use as a potential chemotoxicity stratification tool in breast cancer: from bench to clinic.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025Review
- A computational and structural approach to identify malignant non-synonymous FOXM1 single nucleotide polymorphisms in triple-negative breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Investigating the added value of incorporatingmammographic density to an integrated breastcancer risk model with questionnaire-based riskfactors and polygenic risk score.Research square · 2024Article
- Are Women's Breast Cancer Risk Appraisals in Line with Updated Clinical Risk Estimates Communicated? Results from a UK Family History Risk and Prevention Clinic.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Identification of sequence polymorphism in the D-loop region of mitochondrial DNA as a risk factor for breast cancer.Cancer science · 2024Article
- Assessing the Value of Incorporating a Polygenic Risk Score with Nongenetic Factors for Predicting Breast Cancer Diagnosis in the UK Biobank.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
importanceSingle-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have demonstrated an association with breast cancer susceptibility, but there is limited evidence on how to incorporate them into current breast cancer risk prediction models.
objectiveTo determine whether a panel of 18 SNPs (SNP18) may be used to predict breast cancer in combination with classic risk factors and mammographic density. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsThis cohort study enrolled a subcohort of 9363 women, aged 46 to 73 years, without a previous breast cancer diagnosis from the larger prospective cohort of the PROCAS study (Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening) specifically to evaluate breast cancer risk-assessment methods. Enrollment took place from October 2009 through June 2015 from multiple population-based screening centers in Greater Manchester, England. Follow-up continued through January 5, 2017. EXPOSURES: Genotyping of 18 SNPs, visual-assessment percentage mammographic density, and classic risk assessed by the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model from a self-completed questionnaire at cohort entry. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The predictive ability of SNP18 for breast cancer diagnosis (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ) was assessed using logistic regression odds ratios per interquartile range of the predicted risk.
resultsA total of 9363 women were enrolled in this study (mean [range] age, 59 [46-73] years). Of these, 466 were found to have breast cancer (271 prevalent; 195 incident). SNP18 was similarly predictive when unadjusted or adjusted for mammographic density and classic factors (odds ratios per interquartile range, respectively, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.38-1.77 and 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74), with observed risks being very close to expected (adjusted observed-to-expected odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.69-1.28). A combined risk assessment indicated 18% of the subcohort to be at 5% or greater 10-year risk, compared with 30% of all cancers, 35% of interval-detected cancers, and 42% of stage 2+ cancers. In contrast, 33% of the subcohort were at less than 2% risk but accounted for only 18%, 17%, and 15% of the total, interval, and stage 2+ breast cancers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: SNP18 added substantial information to risk assessment based on the Tyrer-Cuzick model and mammographic density. A combined risk is likely to aid risk-stratified screening and prevention strategies.
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.