ArticleBritish journal of cancer2018
Validation of the IBIS breast cancer risk evaluator for women with lobular carcinoma in-situ.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Society of Surgical Oncology Breast Disease Site Working Group Statement on Bilateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomy: Indications, Outcomes, and Risks.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of a telehealth service to support breast cancer prevention medication uptake: a protocol of a mixed methods study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Lobular Breast Cancer: Histomorphology and Different Concepts of a Special Spectrum of Tumors.Cancers · 2021Review
- The Tyrer-Cuzick Model Inaccurately Predicts Invasive Breast Cancer Risk in Women With LCIS.Annals of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Article
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 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundManagement advice for women with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is hampered by the lack of accurate personalised risk estimates for subsequent invasive breast cancer (BC). Prospective validation of the only tool that estimates individual BC risk for a woman with LCIS, the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study Risk Evaluation Tool (IBIS-RET), is lacking.
methodsUsing population-based cancer registry data for 732 women with LCIS, the calibration and discrimination accuracy of IBIS-RET Version 7.2 were assessed.
resultsThe mean observed 10-year risk of invasive BC was 14.1% (95% CI:11.3%-17.5%). IBIS-RET overestimated invasive BC risk (p = 0.0003) and demonstrated poor discriminatory accuracy (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.48 - 0.62).
conclusionsClinicians should understand that IBIS-RET Version 7.2 may overestimate 10-year invasive BC risk for Australian women with LCIS. The newer IBIS-RET Version 8.0, released September 2017, includes mammographic density and may perform better, but validation is needed.
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.