ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2018
Risks of breast or ovarian cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 predictive test negatives: findings from the EMBRACE study.
Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distribution of age at natural menopause, age at menarche, menstrual cycle length, height and BMI in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers and non-carriers: results from EMBRACE.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Refinement of the assignment to the ACMG/AMP BS3 and PS3 criteria of eightFrontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- 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
- Comprehensive Study of Germline Mutations and Double-Hit Events in Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Economic Modelling of Screen-and-Treat Strategies for Brazilian Women at Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021Article
- Survey of primary care physicians' views about breast and ovarian cancer screening for true BRCA1/2 non-carriers.Journal of community genetics · 2020Article
- Genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer: syndromes, genes, classification of genetic variants and implications for precision medicine.The Journal of pathology · 2019Review
- Two Missense Variants Detected in Breast Cancer Probands Preventing BRCA2-PALB2 Protein Interaction.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
34 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives are proven noncarriers of a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation that is carried by their relatives. The risk of developing breast cancer (BC) or epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in these women is uncertain. The study aimed to estimate risks of invasive BC and EOC in a large cohort of BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives.
methodsWe used cohort analysis to estimate incidences, cumulative risks, and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs).
resultsA total of 1,895 unaffected women were eligible for inclusion in the BC risk analysis and 1,736 in the EOC risk analysis. There were 23 incident invasive BCs and 2 EOCs. The cumulative risk of invasive BC was 9.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9-15%) by age 85 years and the corresponding risk of EOC was 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-2.6%). The SIR for invasive BC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.62-1.40) in the overall cohort, 0.85 (95% CI 0.48-1.50) in noncarriers from BRCA1 families, and 1.03 (95% CI 0.57-1.87) in noncarriers from BRCA2 families. The SIR for EOC was 0.79 (95% CI 0.20-3.17) in the overall cohort.
conclusionOur results did not provide evidence for elevated risks of invasive BC or EOC in BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive test negatives.
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.