Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31725845›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2020

Risk-Adapted Starting Age of Screening for Relatives of Patients With Breast Cancer.

Trasias Mukama, Elham Kharazmi, Xing Xu, Kristina Sundquist, Jan Sundquist, Hermann Brenner, Mahdi Fallah

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Paclitaxel drives TREM2Nature communications · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Extending the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Model of Invasive Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Trasias MukamaDivision of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany.
Elham KharazmiDivision of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany.
Xing XuDivision of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany.
Kristina SundquistCenter for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Jan SundquistCenter for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Hermann BrennerDivision of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany.
Mahdi FallahDivision of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceBreast cancer screening guidelines acknowledge the need for earlier screening for women at increased risk but provide limited guidance for women with a family history of breast cancer. A risk-adapted starting age of screening for relatives of patients with breast cancer may help supplement current screening guidelines.

objectiveTo identify the risk-adapted starting age of breast cancer screening on the basis of a woman's detailed family history. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThis nationwide cohort study analyzed data recorded in the Swedish family-cancer data sets. All women born from 1932 onward and with at least 1 known first-degree relative (FDR) were included (N = 5 099 172). Data from January 1, 1958, to December 31, 2015, were collected. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2017, to March 31, 2019. EXPOSURES: Family history of breast cancer in FDRs and second-degree relatives (SDRs). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary invasive breast cancer diagnosis and the age at which women with different constellations of family history attained the risk level at which breast screening is usually recommended.

resultsOf the 5 099 172 women included in the study, 118 953 (2.3%) received a diagnosis of primary invasive breast cancer. A total of 102 751 women (86.4%; mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 55.9 [11.1] years) did not have family history of breast cancer in FDRs and SDRs at the time of their diagnosis. Risk-adapted starting age of breast cancer screening varied by number of FDRs and SDRs with breast cancer diagnosis and the age at diagnosis of the FDRs. For example, for screening recommendation at age 50 years for the general population (2.2% 10-year cumulative risk), women with multiple affected FDRs, with the youngest affected relative receiving a diagnosis before age 50 years, reached the benchmark risk level at age 27 years. When the youngest relative received a diagnosis after age 50 years, however, this risk level was attained at age 36 years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study identifies possible risk-based starting ages for breast cancer screening based on population-based registers. These results may serve as high-quality evidence to supplement current screening guidelines for relatives of patients with breast cancer.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAdultCohort StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMedical History TakingMiddle AgedRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID31725845
PMCPMC6865319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.