↓ Skip to main content

Development and external validation of a breast cancer absolute risk prediction model in Chinese population

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, May 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development and external validation of a breast cancer absolute risk prediction model in Chinese population
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, May 2021
DOI 10.1186/s13058-021-01439-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuting Han, Jun Lv, Canqing Yu, Yu Guo, Zheng Bian, Yizhen Hu, Ling Yang, Yiping Chen, Huaidong Du, Fangyuan Zhao, Wanqing Wen, Xiao-Ou Shu, Yongbing Xiang, Yu-Tang Gao, Wei Zheng, Hong Guo, Peng Liang, Junshi Chen, Zhengming Chen, Dezheng Huo, Liming Li, Junshi Chen, Zhengming Chen, Robert Clarke, Rory Collins, Yu Guo, Liming Li, Jun Lv, Richard Peto, Robin Walters, Daniel Avery, Ruth Boxall, Derrick Bennett, Yumei Chang, Yiping Chen, Zhengming Chen, Robert Clarke, Huaidong Du, Simon Gilbert, Alex Hacker, Mike Hill, Michael Holmes, Andri Iona, Christiana Kartsonaki, Rene Kerosi, Ling Kong, Om Kurmi, Garry Lancaster, Sarah Lewington, Kuang Lin, John McDonnell, Iona Millwood, Qunhua Nie, Jayakrishnan Radhakrishnan, Paul Ryder, Sam Sansome, Dan Schmidt, Paul Sherliker, Rajani Sohoni, Becky Stevens, Iain Turnbull, Robin Walters, Jenny Wang, Lin Wang, Neil Wright, Ling Yang, Xiaoming Yang, Zheng Bian, Yu Guo, Xiao Han, Can Hou, Jun Lv, Pei, Chao Liu, Canqing Yu, Zengchang Pang, Ruqin Gao, Shanpeng Li, Shaojie Wang, Yongmei Liu, Ranran Du, Yajing Zang, Liang Cheng, Xiaocao Tian, Hua Zhang, Yaoming Zhai, Feng Ning, Xiaohui Sun, Feifei Li, Silu Lv, Junzheng Wang, Wei Hou, Mingyuan Zeng, Ge Jiang, Xue Zhou, Liqiu Yang, Hui He, Bo Yu, Yanjie Li, Qinai Xu, Quan Kang, Ziyan Guo, Dan Wang, Ximin Hu, Jinyan Chen, Yan Fu, Zhenwang Fu, Xiaohuan Wang, Min Weng, Zhendong Guo, Shukuan Wu, Yilei Li, Huimei Li, Zhifang Fu, Ming Wu, Yonglin Zhou, Jinyi Zhou, Ran Tao, Jie Yang, Jian Su, Fang Liu, Jun Zhang, Yihe Hu, Yan Lu, Liangcai Ma, Aiyu Tang, Shuo Zhang, Jianrong Jin, Jingchao Liu, Zhenzhu Tang, Naying Chen, Ying Huang, Mingqiang Li, Jinhuai Meng, Rong Pan, Qilian Jiang, Jian Lan, Yun Liu, Liuping Wei, Liyuan Zhou, Ningyu Chen, Ping Wang, Fanwen Meng, Yulu Qin, Sisi Wang, Xianping Wu, Ningmei Zhang, Xiaofang Chen, Weiwei Zhou, Guojin Luo, Jianguo Li, Xiaofang Chen, Xunfu Zhong, Jiaqiu Liu, Qiang Sun, Pengfei Ge, Xiaolan Ren, Caixia Dong, Hui Zhang, Enke Mao, Xiaoping Wang, Tao Wang, Xi Zhang, Ding Zhang, Gang Zhou, Shixian Feng, Liang Chang, Lei Fan, Yulian Gao, Tianyou He, Huarong Sun, Pan He, Chen Hu, Xukui Zhang, Huifang Wu, Pan He, Min Yu, Ruying Hu, Hao Wang, Yijian Qian, Chunmei Wang, Kaixu Xie, Lingli Chen, Yidan Zhang, Dongxia Pan, Qijun Gu, Yuelong Huang, Biyun Chen, Li Yin, Huilin Liu, Zhongxi Fu, Qiaohua Xu, Xin Xu, Hao Zhang, Huajun Long, Xianzhi Li, Libo Zhang, Zhe Qiu

Abstract

In contrast to developed countries, breast cancer in China is characterized by a rapidly escalating incidence rate in the past two decades, lower survival rate, and vast geographic variation. However, there is no validated risk prediction model in China to aid early detection yet. A large nationwide prospective cohort, China Kadoorie Biobank (CKB), was used to evaluate relative and attributable risks of invasive breast cancer. A total of 300,824 women free of any prior cancer were recruited during 2004-2008 and followed up to Dec 31, 2016. Cox models were used to identify breast cancer risk factors and build a relative risk model. Absolute risks were calculated by incorporating national age- and residence-specific breast cancer incidence and non-breast cancer mortality rates. We used an independent large prospective cohort, Shanghai Women's Health Study (SWHS), with 73,203 women to externally validate the calibration and discriminating accuracy. During a median of 10.2 years of follow-up in the CKB, 2287 cases were observed. The final model included age, residence area, education, BMI, height, family history of overall cancer, parity, and age at menarche. The model was well-calibrated in both the CKB and the SWHS, yielding expected/observed (E/O) ratios of 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-1.09) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.89-0.99), respectively. After eliminating the effect of age and residence, the model maintained moderate but comparable discriminating accuracy compared with those of some previous externally validated models. The adjusted areas under the receiver operating curve (AUC) were 0.634 (95% CI, 0.608-0.661) and 0.585 (95% CI, 0.564-0.605) in the CKB and the SWHS, respectively. Based only on non-laboratory predictors, our model has a good calibration and moderate discriminating capacity. The model may serve as a useful tool to raise individuals' awareness and aid risk-stratified screening and prevention strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Student > Master 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Student > Postgraduate 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Unknown 12 57%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2021.
All research outputs
#13,347,850
of 21,820,060 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#1,239
of 1,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,212
of 349,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,820,060 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 349,952 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them