ArticlePloS one2021
Developing and validating an individualized breast cancer risk prediction model for women attending breast cancer screening.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Development and performance of female breast cancer incidence risk prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of prediction models for risk of breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding the contribution of lifestyle in breast cancer risk prediction: a systematic review of models applicable to Europe.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Alcohol consumption and breast lesions: targets for risk-based screening in high-risk Italian women.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
- Mammographic calcifications association with risk of advanced breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Optimizing breast cancer screening strategies for women with different BMI levels in Ghana: A simulation-based study on BMI-dependent tumor growth model.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Critical Risk Assessment, Diagnosis, and Survival Analysis of Breast Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Family history of breast cancer, mammographic breast density and breast cancer risk: Findings from a cohort study of Korean women.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2022Article
- Long-Term Risk of Breast Cancer after Diagnosis of Benign Breast Disease by Screening Mammography.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Mammographic features of benign breast lesions and risk of subsequent breast cancer in women attending breast cancer screening.European radiology · 2022Article
- Diagnose earlier, live longer? The impact of cervical and breast cancer screening on life span.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral studies have proposed personalized strategies based on women's individual breast cancer risk to improve the effectiveness of breast cancer screening. We designed and internally validated an individualized risk prediction model for women eligible for mammography screening.
methodsRetrospective cohort study of 121,969 women aged 50 to 69 years, screened at the long-standing population-based screening program in Spain between 1995 and 2015 and followed up until 2017. We used partly conditional Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and individual risks for age, family history of breast cancer, previous benign breast disease, and previous mammographic features. We internally validated our model with the expected-to-observed ratio and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
resultsDuring a mean follow-up of 7.5 years, 2,058 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. All three risk factors were strongly associated with breast cancer risk, with the highest risk being found among women with family history of breast cancer (aHR: 1.67), a proliferative benign breast disease (aHR: 3.02) and previous calcifications (aHR: 2.52). The model was well calibrated overall (expected-to-observed ratio ranging from 0.99 at 2 years to 1.02 at 20 years) but slightly overestimated the risk in women with proliferative benign breast disease. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 58.7% to 64.7%, depending of the time horizon selected.
conclusionsWe developed a risk prediction model to estimate the short- and long-term risk of breast cancer in women eligible for mammography screening using information routinely reported at screening participation. The model could help to guiding individualized screening strategies aimed at improving the risk-benefit balance of mammography screening programs.
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.