Incidence of colorectal cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from a follow-up study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes confer increased susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer and to a spectrum of other cancers. There is controversy regarding the risk of colorectal cancer conferred by germline mutations in these two genes. METHODS: We followed 7015 women with a BRCA mutation for new cases of colorectal cancer. Incidence rates in carriers were compared with population-specific incidence rates, and standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) were estimated. The expected numbers of cancers were computed by multiplying person-years at risk by the appropriate age-, sex- and country-specific incidence rates from the five countries. RESULTS: Twenty-one incident colorectal cancer cases were observed among all mutation carriers, compared with 23.6 cases expected. The SIR for BRCA1 carriers was 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54-1.40, P=0.7) and for BRCA2 carriers was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.30-1.81, P=0.7). The SIR for colon cancer was 3.81 (95% CI 1.77-7.23) for women below the age of 50 years (both genes combined) and was 0.60 (95% CI 0.33-1.00) for women aged 50 years and above. CONCLUSION: The risk of colorectal cancer is increased in female carriers of BRCA1 mutations below the age of 50 years but not in women with BRCA2 mutations or in older women.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".