The DOI matches its Crossref record; 98 of the 98 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessing Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer: A Review of Risk Assessment Models
Abstract
Women who are at high risk of breast cancer can be offered more intensive surveillance or prophylactic measures, such as surgery or chemoprevention. Central to decisions regarding the level of prevention is accurate and individualized risk assessment. This review aims to distill the diverse literature and provide practicing clinicians with an overview of the available risk assessment methods. Risk assessments fall into two groups: the risk of carrying a mutation in a high-risk gene such as BRCA1 or BRCA2 and the risk of developing breast cancer with or without such a mutation. Knowledge of breast cancer risks, taken together with the risks and benefits of the intervention, is needed to choose an appropriate disease management strategy. A number of models have been developed for assessing these risks, but independent validation of such models has produced variable results. Some models are able to predict both mutation carriage risks and breast cancer risk; however, to date, all are limited by only moderate discriminatory accuracy. Further improvements in the knowledge of how to best integrate both new risk factors and newly discovered genetic variants into these models will allow clinicians to more accurately determine which women are most likely to develop breast cancer. These steady and incremental improvements in models will need to undergo revalidation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Jemal, A., Bray, F., Center, M. M., Ferlay, J., Ward, E., & Forman, D. (2011) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.20107 · Cited by 54,679
Global Cancer Statistics, 2002
Parkin, D. M., Bray, F., Ferlay, J., & Pisani, P. (2005) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/canjclin.55.2.74 · Cited by 18,196
Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators (2002) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.288.3.321 · Cited by 15,889
Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Ward, E., Hao, Y., Xu, J., Murray, T., & Thun, M. J. (2008) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/ca.2007.0010 · Cited by 10,188
Gail, M. H., Brinton, L. A., Byar, D. P., Corle, D. K., Green, S. B., Schairer, C., & Mulvihill, J. J. (1989) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879 · Cited by 3,334
Genetic Heterogeneity and Penetrance Analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 Genes in Breast Cancer Families
Ford, D., Easton, D. F., Stratton, M., Narod, S., Goldgar, D., Devilee, P., Bishop, D. T., Weber, B., Lenoir, G., Chang-Claude, J., et al. (1998) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/301749 · Cited by 3,037
Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study
(2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)14065-2 · Cited by 2,993
Mammographic Density and the Risk and Detection of Breast Cancer
Boyd, N. F., Guo, H., Martin, L. J., Sun, L., Stone, J., Fishell, E., Jong, R. A., Hislop, G., Chiarelli, A., Minkin, S., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa062790 · Cited by 2,478
Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci
Easton, D. F., Pooley, K. A., Dunning, A. M., Pharoah, P. D. P., Thompson, D., Ballinger, D. G., Struewing, J. P., Morrison, J., Field, H., Luben, R., et al. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05887 · Cited by 2,319
Self-citation
Cited by
Treatment of symptoms of the menopause: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline
Stuenkel, C. A., Davis, S. R., Gompel, A., Lumsden, M. A., Murad, M. H., Pinkerton, J. V., & Santen, R. J. (2015) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2015-2236 · Cited by 884
A Systematic Assessment of Benefits and Risks to Guide Breast Cancer Screening Decisions
Pace, L. E., & Keating, N. L. (2014) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2014.1398 · Cited by 461
Eccles, S. A., Aboagye, E. O., Ali, S., Anderson, A. S., Armes, J., Berditchevski, F., Blaydes, J. P., Brennan, K., Brown, N. J., Bryant, H. E., et al. (2013) · Breast Cancer Research · doi:10.1186/bcr3493 · Cited by 421
Self-citationPractice Bulletin Number 179: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women
(2017) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002158 · Cited by 258
Lynam, A. L., Dennis, J. M., Owen, K. R., Oram, R. A., Jones, A. G., Shields, B. M., & Ferrat, L. A. (2020) · Diagnostic and Prognostic Research · doi:10.1186/s41512-020-00075-2 · Cited by 142
Metadata
- Authors
- Amir, E., Freedman, O. C., Seruga, B., & Evans, D. G.
- Venue
- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-04-28
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 680-691
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2095697356
- Cited by
- 464
- References
- 98
- FWCI
- 20.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessing Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer: A Review of Risk Assessment Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/djq088
- The paper
- Amir, E., Freedman, O. C., Seruga, B., & Evans, D. G. (2010). Assessing Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer: A Review of Risk Assessment Models. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djq088
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
