The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Application of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models in Clinical Practice
Abstract
Breast cancer risk assessment provides an estimation of disease risk that can be used to guide management for women at all levels of risk. In addition, the likelihood that breast cancer risk is due to specific genetic susceptibility (such as BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations) can be determined. Recent developments have reinforced the clinical importance of breast cancer risk assessment. Tamoxifen chemoprevention as well as prevention studies such as the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene are available to women at increased risk of developing breast cancer. In addition, specific management strategies are now defined for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Risk may be assessed as the likelihood of developing breast cancer (using risk assessment models) or as the likelihood of detecting a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (using prior probability models). Each of the models has advantages and disadvantages, and all need to be interpreted in context. We review available risk assessment tools and discuss their application. As illustrated by clinical examples, optimal counseling may require the use of several models, as well as clinical judgment, to provide the most accurate and useful information to women and their families.
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
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
Breast Cancer after Prophylactic Bilateral Mastectomy in Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation
Meijers-Heijboer, H., van Geel, B., van Putten, W. L. J., Henzen-Logmans, S. C., Seynaeve, C., Menke-Pluymers, M. B. E., Bartels, C. C. M., Verhoog, L. C., van den Ouweland, A. M. W., Niermeijer, M. F., et al. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200107193450301 · Cited by 973
Efficacy of Bilateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Gene Mutation Carriers
Hartmann, L. C., Sellers, T. A., Schaid, D. J., Frank, T. S., Soderberg, C. L., Sitta, D. L., Frost, M. H., Grant, C. S., Donohue, J. H., Woods, J. E., et al. (2001) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/93.21.1633 · Cited by 743
Cited by
Machine Learning Applications in Cancer Prognosis and Prediction
Kourou, K., Exarchos, T. P., Exarchos, K. P., Karamouzis, M. V., & Fotiadis, D. I. (2015) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2014.11.005 · Cited by 3,338
American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Screening with MRI as an Adjunct to Mammography
Saslow, D., Boetes, C., Burke, W., Harms, S., Leach, M. O., Lehman, C. D., Morris, E., Pisano, E., Schnall, M., Sener, S., et al. (2007) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/canjclin.57.2.75 · Cited by 2,637
Meta-Analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Penetrance
Chen, S., & Parmigiani, G. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.09.1066 · Cited by 1,802
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force* (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-143-5-200509060-00011 · Cited by 405
Oestrogen exposure and breast cancer risk
Travis, R. C., & Key, T. J. (2003) · Breast Cancer Research · doi:10.1186/bcr628 · Cited by 346
Metadata
- Authors
- Domchek, S. M., Eisen, A., Calzone, K., Stopfer, J., Blackwood, A., & Weber, B. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2003-02-15
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 593-601
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2116841457
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 11.05
- 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: Application of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models in Clinical Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2003.07.007
- The paper
- Domchek, S. M., Eisen, A., Calzone, K., Stopfer, J., Blackwood, A., & Weber, B. L. (2003). Application of Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models in Clinical Practice. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2003.07.007
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.
