SynthesisStatistics in medicine2025
Adjusting for Ascertainment Bias in Meta-Analysis of Penetrance for Cancer Risk.
Synthesis in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Multi-gene panel testing allows efficient detection of pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes including moderate-risk genes such as ATM and PALB2. A growing number of studies examine the risk of breast cancer (BC) conferred by pathogenic variants of these genes. A meta-analysis combining the reported risk estimates can provide an overall estimate of age-specific risk of developing BC, that is, penetrance for a gene. However, estimates reported by case-control studies often suffer from ascertainment bias. Currently, there is no method available to adjust for such bias in this setting. We consider a Bayesian random effect meta-analysis method that can synthesize different types of risk measures and extend it to incorporate studies with ascertainment bias. This is achieved by introducing a bias term in the model and assigning appropriate priors. We validate the method through a simulation study and apply it to estimate BC penetrance for carriers of pathogenic variants in the ATM and PALB2 genes. Our simulations show that the proposed method results in more accurate and precise penetrance estimates compared to when no adjustment is made for ascertainment bias or when such biased studies are discarded from the analysis. The overall estimated BC risk for individuals with pathogenic variants are (1) 5.77% (3.22%-9.67%) by age 50 and 26.13% (20.31%-32.94%) by age 80 for ATM; (2) 12.99% (6.48%-22.23%) by age 50, and 44.69% (34.40%-55.80%) by age 80 for PALB2. The proposed method allows meta-analyses to include studies with ascertainment bias, resulting in inclusion of more studies and thereby more accurate estimates.
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.