ArticleInternational journal of cancer2020
Establishing a valid approach for estimating familial risk of cancer explained by common genetic variants.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging trends in the global burden of colorectal cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2022Article
- Validation of Genetic Markers Associated with Survival in Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Observational
- Colorectal Cancer Risk by Genetic Variants in Populations With and Without Colonoscopy History.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Article
- Candidate Gene Discovery in Hereditary Colorectal Cancer and Polyposis Syndromes-Considerations for Future Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We critically examined existing approaches for the estimation of the excess familial risk of cancer that can be attributed to identified common genetic risk variants and propose an alternative, more straightforward approach for calculating this proportion using well-established epidemiological methodology. We applied the underlying equations of the traditional approaches and the new epidemiological approach for colorectal cancer (CRC) in a large population-based case-control study in Germany with 4,447 cases and 3,480 controls, who were recruited from 2003 to 2016 and for whom interview, medical and genomic data were available. Having a family history of CRC (FH) was associated with a 1.77-fold risk increase in our study population (95% CI 1.52-2.07). Traditional approaches yielded estimates of the FH-associated risk explained by 97 common genetics variants from 9.6% to 23.1%, depending on various assumptions. Our alternative approach resulted in smaller and more consistent estimates of this proportion, ranging from 5.4% to 14.3%. Commonly employed methods may lead to strongly divergent and possibly exaggerated estimates of excess familial risk of cancer explained by associated known common genetic variants. Our results suggest that familial risk and risk associated with known common genetic variants might reflect two complementary major sources of risk.
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.