ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2020
Validating Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models in the Korean Cancer Prevention Study-II Biobank.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Relationship between menopausal hormone therapy and incidence risk of breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Rewiring the Molecular Interplay of CDK4/6 Inhibitors in Lung Cancer: From Cell Cycle Control to Immune Microenvironment Remodeling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Incorporating polygenic risk scores and social determinants of health across populations: Considerations and best practices in research.American journal of human genetics · 2026Review
- Wasm-iCARE: a portable and privacy-preserving web module to build, validate, and apply absolute risk models.JAMIA open · 2024Article
- Wasm-iCARE: a portable and privacy-preserving web module to build, validate, and apply absolute risk models.ArXiv · 2023Article
- Development of a Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model Incorporating Polygenic Risk Scores and Nongenetic Risk Factors for Korean Women.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023Article
- Polygenic risk scores for prediction of breast cancer in Korean women.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tools for Stratifying Women into Risk Groups: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2023Review
- Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict Recurrence within 10 Years after Breast Cancer Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.Cancers · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRisk prediction models may be useful for precision breast cancer screening. We aimed to evaluate the performance of breast cancer risk models developed in European-ancestry studies in a Korean population.
methodsWe compared discrimination and calibration of three multivariable risk models in a cohort of 77,457 women from the Korean Cancer Prevention Study (KCPS)-II. The first incorporated U.S. breast cancer incidence and mortality rates, U.S. risk factor distributions, and RR estimates from European-ancestry studies. The second recalibrated the first by using Korean incidence and mortality rates and Korean risk factor distributions, while retaining the European-ancestry RR estimates. Finally, we derived a Korea-specific model incorporating the RR estimates from KCPS.
resultsThe U.S. European-ancestry breast cancer risk model was well calibrated among Korean women <50 years [expected/observed = 1.124 (0.989, 1.278)] but markedly overestimated the risk for those ≥50 years [E/O = 2.472 (2.005, 3.049)]. Recalibrating absolute risk estimates using Korean breast cancer rates and risk distributions markedly improved the calibration in women ≥50 [E/O = 1.018 (0.825, 1.255)]. The model incorporating Korean-based RRs had similar but not clearly improved performance relative to the recalibrated model.
conclusionsThe poor performance of the U.S. European-ancestry breast cancer risk model among older Korean women highlights the importance of tailoring absolute risk models to specific populations. Recalibrating the model using Korean incidence and mortality rates and risk factor distributions greatly improved performance. IMPACT: The data will provide valuable information to plan and evaluate actions against breast cancer focused on primary prevention and early detection in Korean women.
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.