Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42547567›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2026

Comparison of NICE criteria with the BOADICEA multifactorial risk model to guide breast cancer risk assessment and referral amongst women under age 50 within primary care.

Reuben Frost, Lorenzo Ficorella, Amy Berrington de Gonzalez, Antonis C Antoniou, Montserrat García-Closas, Juliet A Usher-Smith

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 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

6 authors.

Reuben FrostDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Lorenzo FicorellaCentre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0577-1571
Amy Berrington de GonzalezDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Antonis C AntoniouCentre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Montserrat García-ClosasDivision of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Juliet A Usher-SmithPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. jau20@medschl.cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8501-2531

Funding

Breast Cancer Now (BCN) BGS-Q4-Y1 to Y5Cancer Research UK (CRUK) PPRPGM-Nov20\100002Cancer Research UK (CRUK) SEBCD3-2024/100001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends that women at above-population-level risk of breast cancer (BC) are offered enhanced screening and risk-reducing interventions. Identification of these women largely relies on referral through primary care based on family history criteria.

methodsWe compared the performance of the NICE criteria with versions of the BOADICEA multifactorial risk model in identifying women who developed BC within 10 years. Analyses included 1258 women aged under 50 years with family history, reproductive, lifestyle and polygenic risk data recruited to the Generations Study between 2004 and 2011 (392 BC cases), weighted to represent the UK population with respect to age and family history of BC.

resultsNICE criteria identified 4.4% of women who developed BC within 10 years amongst 1.4% of women who met referral criteria. The full BOADICEA model identified up to 35% of women who developed BC, but with lower specificity and 26.5% of women meeting referral criteria.

conclusionsNICE family history-based criteria applied to women under 50 miss most BCs occurring within 10 years. Multifactorial risk assessment in primary care could substantially improve the identification of women at risk who could be offered interventions before being invited to population-based screening.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.