Trial reportBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2026
Risk Stratified Breast Cancer Screening: Early Outcomes and Psychological Impact from PRSONAL - a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06060938 (Population-based Randomized Study Of a Novel Breast Cancer Risk ALgorithm and Stratified Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Population-based Randomized Study Of a Novel Breast Cancer Risk ALgorithm and Stratified Screening
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk-based breast cancer screening.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Real-World Evidence for Breast Cancer Risk Stratification: Insights from the P.I.N.K. Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Polygenic risk scores in cancer.Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRisk-stratified screening for breast cancer might improve benefit-to-harm ratio, however, psychological consequences of risk communication and low-risk women's acceptance of de-escalated screening are unclear. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe carried out a randomized clinical trial allocating women aged 50-67 years attending their routine biennial screening mammography 1:1 to a control and intervention group. Women in the control group continued the standard program without risk stratification. Women in the intervention group had their 10-year breast cancer risk assessed using the comprehensive CanRisk model. Around day 90, risk was automatically communicated as low (<2.44%), intermediate (2.44-5.14%), elevated (5.15-<7.99%), and high (≥8.00%) with suggested screening intervals of four years (low), two years (intermediate), one year (elevated) and one year (high risk), and additional investigations for those at elevated and high-risk.
resultsOf the 3,949 invited women, 1,801 (46%) were enrolled. Of the intervention group, 49.6%, 38.8%, 8.4% and 3.1% were at low, intermediate, elevated and high risk, respectively. After 292 days, 3.8% (95% confidence interval = 2.3-6.1) of the low-risk women had rejected de-escalated screening. The most significant change of psychological indicators from baseline to day 180 was a 1.6-point reduction of life quality among controls (p < 0.0001), but also reductions of breast cancer worry in the low and intermediate risk groups vs. controls (-0.27, p = 0.007 and -0.33, p = 0.004).
conclusionRisk-stratified breast cancer screening is feasible and de-escalated screening acceptable for low-risk women. Automated risk communication has minimal - if any - impact on short-term psychological well-being. Final conclusions await prespecified 800 days end-of-follow-up.
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.