Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41650366›Full record

ArticleJCO precision oncology2026

Modeling Individual-Level Uncertainty From Missing Data in Multifactorial Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.

Bethan L White, Lorenzo Ficorella, Xin Yang, Kamila Czene, Mikael Eriksson, Per Hall, Stephanie Archer, Marc Tischkowitz, Juliet A Usher-Smith, Douglas F Easton and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO precision oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Bethan L WhiteDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0000-7856-7179
Lorenzo FicorellaDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0577-1571
Xin YangDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0037-3790
Kamila CzeneDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mikael ErikssonDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8135-4270
Per HallDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5640-9126
Stephanie ArcherPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Marc TischkowitzDepartment of Genomic Medicine, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7880-0628
Juliet A Usher-SmithPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8501-2531
Douglas F EastonDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2444-3247
Antonis C AntoniouDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9223-3116

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMultifactorial breast cancer (BC) risk prediction models use a range of predictors to estimate an individual's chance of developing BC. Data on risk factors are often incomplete, and point estimates calculated when data are missing can mask considerable uncertainty. Quantifying this uncertainty is critical for effective risk communication.

methodsWe used Monte Carlo simulation methods to estimate the distribution of 10-year BC risk for individuals with missing data, using the BOADICEA multifactorial model as an example. Multivariate imputation by chained equations with large representative reference data sets was used to sample missing covariates. We developed a framework for estimating the uncertainty distribution, uncertainty intervals (UIs), and probability of reclassification, which can be applied to any given individual with missing risk factor data. This was applied to estimating individual-level uncertainty distributions and quantifying the probability of reclassification when groups of risk factors are measured, for a range of example women.

resultsWomen with limited risk factor data had considerable uncertainty in their estimated BC risk, and 95% UIs spanned all risk categories. This was especially relevant for women classified as moderate-risk, such as those with strong family history or a moderate-risk pathogenic variant. Reclassification probability in this case was as high as 57.5%, with 95% UI of 0.9% to 9.3% for the 10-year risk from age 40 years. Risk certainty improved with additional data collection, particularly genetic information or mammographic density measurement.

conclusionOur results demonstrate that, in some cases, there is considerable probability of reclassification after collecting missing data. Methodology presented here can identify situations where it would be most beneficial to collect additional information, to enable better informed clinical decision making.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodPrediction AlgorithmsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID41650366
PMCPMC12888909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.