The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: To develop a simple scoring system for the likelihood of identifying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Methods: DNA samples from affected subjects from 422 non-Jewish families with a history of breast and/or ovarian cancer were screened for BRCA1 mutations and a subset of 318 was screened for BRCA2 by whole gene screening techniques. Using a combination of results from screening and the family history of mutation negative and positive kindreds, a simple scoring system (Manchester scoring system) was devised to predict pathogenic mutations and particularly to discriminate at the 10% likelihood level. A second separate dataset of 192 samples was subsequently used to test the model’s predictive value. This was further validated on a third set of 258 samples and compared against existing models. Results: The scoring system includes a cut-off at 10 points for each gene. This equates to >10% probability of a pathogenic mutation in BRCA1 and BRCA2 individually. The Manchester scoring system had the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity at 10% prediction for the presence of mutations as shown by its highest C-statistic and was far superior to BRCAPRO. Conclusion: The scoring system is useful in identifying mutations particularly in BRCA2. The algorithm may need modifying to include pathological data when calculating whether to screen for BRCA1 mutations. It is considerably less time-consuming for clinicians than using computer models and if implemented routinely in clinical practice will aid in selecting families most suitable for DNA sampling for diagnostic testing.
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
Prediction of pathogenic mutations in patients with early-onset breast cancer by family history
Lalloo, F., Varley, J., Ellis, D., Moran, A., O'Dair, L., Pharoah, P., & Evans, D. G. R. (2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)12856-5 · Cited by 202
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 36
- 10.1086/301749 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1086/301614 · DOI
- 1997, Am J Hum Genet, 60, 1013
- 1996, Cancer Res, 56, 3663
- 2000, Am J Hum Genet, 77, 207
- 10.1136/jmg.37.12.e42 · doi:10.1136/jmg.37.12.e42
- 10.1086/301670 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1056/NEJM199705153362002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/jama.1997.03550150046034 · DOI · Paper page
- 1998, J Clin Oncol, 16, 2417, 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.7.2417 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1200/JCO.20.6.1480 · doi:10.1200/jco.20.6.1480 · Paper page
- 10.1002/cncr.10223 · DOI
- 10.1200/JCO.2002.05.121 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/jnci/94.11.844 · DOI
- 10.1200/JCO.2003.07.007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/jmg.40.7.503 · doi:10.1136/jmg.40.7.503
- Peelen T. Genetics of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in the Netherlands. Leiden, The Netherlands: PhD thesis, Leiden University, 2001:115–28.
- 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1626 · doi:10.1054/bjoc.2000.1626
- 10.1002/ijc.10527 · doi:10.1002/ijc.10527
- 10.1136/jmg.37.10.792 · DOI
- 2002, Familial Cancer, 3, 131
- 1998, Br J Cancer, 77, 2199, 10.1038/bjc.1998.366 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.90.21.10325 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1200/JCO.2002.09.023 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/jmg.35.1.10 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJM199705153362003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/jnci/91.11.943 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/jnci/93.16.1215 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1056/NEJM199601183340301 · DOI · Paper page
- 2001, Breast Cancer Res, 4, 1, 10.1186/bcr410 · DOI
- 10.1136/jmg.40.9.e107 · DOI
- 1996, J Clin Oncol, 14, 1730, 10.1200/JCO.1996.14.5.1730 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0046-8177(00)80014-3 · DOI
- 10.1093/jnci/91.15.1310 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1034/j.1399-0004.2000.580408.x · DOI
- 10.1038/sj.bjc.6600008 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force* (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-143-5-200509060-00011 · Cited by 405
Nelson, H. D., Huffman, L. H., Fu, R., & Harris, E. L. (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-143-5-200509060-00012 · Cited by 346
Dosage analysis of cancer predisposition genes by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification
Bunyan, D. J., Eccles, D. M., Sillibourne, J., Wilkins, E., Thomas, N. S., Shea-Simonds, J., Duncan, P. J., Curtis, C. E., Robinson, D. O., Harvey, J. F., et al. (2004) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6602121 · Cited by 264
Self-citationDelivering widespread BRCA testing and PARP inhibition to patients with ovarian cancer
George, A., Kaye, S., & Banerjee, S. (2017) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.191 · Cited by 158
Evans, D. G. R., van Veen, E. M., Byers, H. J., Wallace, A. J., Ellingford, J. M., Beaman, G., Santoyo-Lopez, J., Aitman, T. J., Eccles, D. M., Lalloo, F. I., et al. (2018) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.07.002 · Cited by 95
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Evans, D. G. R., Eccles, D. M., Rahman, N., Young, K., Bulman, M., Amir, E., Shenton, A., Howell, A., & Lalloo, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Genetics
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 474-480
- ISSN
- 0022-2593 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-6244
- OpenAlex
- W2126170418
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jmg.2003.017996
- The paper
- Evans, D. G. R., Eccles, D. M., Rahman, N., Young, K., Bulman, M., Amir, E., Shenton, A., Howell, A., & Lalloo, F. (2004). A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO. Journal of Medical Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.2003.017996
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.