ArticlePloS one2025
Colorectal cancer risk prediction using a simple multivariable model.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of a polygenic risk score in patients with late-onset, early-onset, familial, or hereditary colorectal cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate population stratification of colorectal cancer risk enables identification of individuals who would benefit from screening and risk-reducing interventions. We conducted a population-based cohort study using almost 400,000 unaffected UK Biobank participants who were aged 40-69 years at their baseline assessment and who had genetically determined UK ancestry. For women and men separately, we developed (i) a multivariable risk prediction model using family history, a polygenic risk score (PRS) and clinical risk factors, and (ii) a simple model comprising family history and a PRS. We then compared their performance to that of existing models. The models were developed using Cox regression with age as the time axis in a 70% training dataset. The performance of the 10-year risk of colorectal cancer was assessed in a 30% testing dataset using Cox regression to estimate the hazard ratio per standard deviation of risk, Harrell's C-index to assess discrimination and logistic regression to assess calibration. There were 214,183 women and 181,889 men in the dataset with 1,913 women and 2,598 men diagnosed with colorectal cancer during the follow-up period. The mean age at diagnosis was 66.4 years (standard deviation = 7.3 years) for women and 67.3 years (standard deviation = 6.7 years) for men. In the 30% testing dataset, the new multivariable models discriminated better (Harrell's C-index = 0.690, 95% CI = 0.669 to 0.712 for women; 0.699, 95% CI = 0.681 to 0.717 for men) than the new family history and PRS models (Harrell's C-index = 0.683, 95% CI = 0.663 to 0.704 for women; 0.692, 95% CI = 0.673 to 0.710 for men; change in discrimination P = 0.02 for women and P = 0.01 for men). Our models identify individuals who are at increased risk of colorectal cancer and who would benefit from personalised screening and risk-reduction options.
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.