MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315815669 · doi:10.1158/1940-6207.prev-08-b7

Abstract B7: Breast cancer risks in women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer who have tested negative for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation

2008· article· en· W2315815669 on OpenAlex
Kelly Metcalfe, Amy Finch, Aletta Poll, Doug Horsman, Charmaine Kim‐Sing, Jenna Scott, Robert E. Royer, Ping Sun, Steven A. Narod

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Prevention Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerFamily historyMedicineCancerOvarian cancerOncologyGynecologyInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)ObstetricsFirst-degree relatives

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract B7 Introduction Genetic testing for mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 is available in Canada for women with a significant family history of breast cancer. For the majority of tested women, a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation is not found, and counselling regarding breast cancer risk is based on the review of the pedigree. In this prospective study, we estimate breast cancer risks in women with a family history of breast cancer and for whom the proband tested negative for a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Methods Families with two or more breast cancers under the age of 50, or with three cases of breast cancer at any age and who tested negative for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were identified. Follow-up information on cancer status was collected on all first-degree relatives of breast cancer cases. The standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for breast cancer were calculated by dividing the observed numbers of breast cancer by the expected numbers of breast cancers, based on rates in the provincial cancer registries. Results 1492 women from 365 families were included in the analyses. The 1492 first-degree relatives of breast cancer cases contributed 9109 person years of follow-up. 65 women developed breast cancer, compared to 15.2 expected number (SIR = 4.3). The SIR was highest for women under the age of 40 (SIR = 14.9) and decreased with increasing age. However, the absolute risk was higher for women between age 50 and 70 (1% per year) than for women between the ages of 30 and 50 (0.4% per year). There was no elevated risk for ovarian, colon or any other form of cancer. Discussion Women with a significant family history of breast cancer (ie. two or more breast cancers under the age of 50, or three or more breast cancers at any age) but who test negative for BRCA mutations have approximately a four-fold risk of breast cancer. Women in these families may be candidates for tamoxifen chemoprevention or intensified breast screening with MRI. Citation Information: Cancer Prev Res 2008;1(7 Suppl):B7.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it