Erratum: Breast cancer genetic risk profile is differentially associated with interval and screen-detected breast cancers Ann Oncol 2015; 26: 517-522 doi 10.1093/annonc/mdu565;Breast cancer genetic risk profile is differentially associated with interval and screen-detected breast cancers

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 517-522

  Li, Jingmei ^a   Holm, J ^a   Bergh, J ^a   Eriksson, M ^a   Darabi, H ^a   Lindstrom L S ^a   Tornberg S ^b   Hall, P ^a   Czene, K ^a  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^b Stockholm Regional Cancer Centre   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Personalized medicine; Polygenic risk score

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; TRANSCRIPTOME;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER RISK; CONTROLLED STUDY; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR POSITIVE BREAST CANCER; FEMALE; GENETIC DIFFERENCE; GENETIC RISK; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; POLYGENIC RISK SCORE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONGENITAL MALFORMATION; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETICS; MAMMARY GLAND; MIDDLE AGED; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; REGISTER; SWEDEN;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; MAMMARY GLANDS, HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; REGISTRIES; SWEDEN; TRANSCRIPTOME;

EID: 84933053038     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw096     Document Type: Erratum

References (22)

1. Michailidou K, Hall P, Gonzalez-Neira A et al. Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 353-361, 361. e351-352.
2. Mavaddat N, Pharoah PDP, Michailidou K et al. Prediction of breast cancer risk based on profiling with common genetic variants. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014; under review.
3. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA, Khoury MJ. Implications of small effect sizes of individual genetic variants on the design and interpretation of genetic association studies of complex diseases. Am J Epidemiol 2006; 164: 609-614.
4. Burton H, Chowdhury S, Dent T et al. Public health implications from COGS and potential for risk stratification and screening. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 349-351.
5. Pharoah PD, Antoniou AC, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Polygenes, risk prediction, and targeted prevention of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 2796-2803.
6. Dudbridge F. Power and predictive accuracy of polygenic risk scores. PLoS Genet 2013; 9: e1003348.
7. Rayson D, Payne JI, Abdolell M et al. Comparison of clinical-pathologic characteristics and outcomes of true interval and screen-detected invasive breast cancer among participants of a Canadian breast screening program: a nested case-control study. Clin Breast Cancer 2011; 11: 27-32.
8. Domingo L, Sala M, Servitja S et al. Phenotypic characterization and risk factors for interval breast cancers in a population-based breast cancer screening program in Barcelona, Spain. Cancer Causes Control 2010; 21: 1155-1164.
9. Houssami N, Irwig L, Ciatto S. Radiological surveillance of interval breast cancers in screening programmes. Lancet Oncol 2006; 7: 259-265.
10. Moberg K, Grundstrom H, Tornberg S et al. Two models for radiological reviewing of interval cancers. J Med Screen 1999; 6: 35-39.
11. Gilliland FD, Joste N, Stauber PM et al. Biologic characteristics of interval and screen-detected breast cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 743-749.
12. Porter PL, El-Bastawissi AY, Mandelson MT et al. Breast tumor characteristics as predictors of mammographic detection: comparison of interval-and screendetected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 2020-2028.
13. Holm J, Humphreys K, Li J et al. Risk factors and tumor characteristics of interval cancers differ by mammographic density. J Clin Oncol 2014; in press.
14. Lind H, Svane G, Kemetli L, Tornberg S. Breast Cancer Screening Program in Stockholm County, Sweden-Aspects of Organization and Quality Assurance. Breast Care (Basel) 2010; 5: 353-357.
15. Li J, Szekely L, Eriksson L et al. High-throughput mammographic-density measurement: a tool for risk prediction of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2012; 14: R114.
16. Lindström LS, Jauhiainen A, Loboda A et al. Gene signature model improves standard breast cancer metastasis risk prediction: population-based nested casecontrol study. JAMA Oncol 2014; under review.
17. Eriksson L, Czene K, Rosenberg LU et al. Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res 2013; 15: R48.
18. Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval-and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 1081-1087.
19. Crosier M, Scott D, Wilson RG et al. Differences in Ki67 and c-erbB2 expression between screen-detected and true interval breast cancers. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5: 2682-2688.
20. Carney PA, Steiner E, Goodrich ME et al. Discovery of breast cancers within 1 year of a normal screening mammogram: how are they found? Ann Fam Med 2006; 4: 512-518.
21. Cowan WK, Angus B, Gray JC et al. A study of interval breast cancer within the NHS breast screening programme. J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 140-146.
22. Kalager M, Tamimi RM, Bretthauer M, Adami HO. Prognosis in women with interval breast cancer: population based observational cohort study. Brit Med J 2012; 345: e7536.