Current Status of the Management of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Asia: First Report by the Asian BRCA Consortium
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations are associated with an increased lifetime risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Compared with the Western developed countries, genetic testing and risk assessment for HBOC in Asia are less available, thus prohibiting the appropriate surveillance, clinical strategies and cancer management. METHODS: The current status of HBOC management in 14 Asian countries, including genetic counselling/testing uptakes and clinical management options, was reviewed. We analysed how economic factors, healthcare and legal frameworks, and cultural issues affect the genetic service availability in Asia. RESULTS: In 2012, only an estimated 4,000 breast cancer cases from 14 Asian countries have benefited from genetic services. Genetic testing costs and the absence of their adoption into national healthcare systems are the main economic barriers for approaching genetic services. Training programmes, regional accredited laboratories and healthcare professionals are not readily available in most of the studied countries. A lack of legal frameworks against genetic discrimination and a lack of public awareness of cancer risk assessment also provide challenges to HBOC management in Asia. CONCLUSIONS: The Asian BRCA Consortium reports the current disparities in genetic services for HBOC in Asia and urges the policy makers, healthcare sectors and researchers to address the limitations in HBOC management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it