U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Evans DG, Astley S, Stavrinos P, et al. Improvement in risk prediction, early detection and prevention of breast cancer in the NHS Breast Screening Programme and family history clinics: a dual cohort study. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2016 Aug. (Programme Grants for Applied Research, No. 4.11.)

Cover of Improvement in risk prediction, early detection and prevention of breast cancer in the NHS Breast Screening Programme and family history clinics: a dual cohort study

Improvement in risk prediction, early detection and prevention of breast cancer in the NHS Breast Screening Programme and family history clinics: a dual cohort study.

Show details

References

1.
Cancer Research UK Statistics For Breast Cancer. Cancer Incidence for Common Cancers. URL: www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer info/cancerstats/incidence/commoncancers/2011 (accessed 17 June 2014).
2.
McIntosh A, Shaw C, Evans G, Turnbull N, Bahar N, Barclay M, et al. Clinical Guidelines and Evidence Review for The Classification and Care of Women at Risk of Familial Breast Cancer. NICE guideline CG14. London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care/University of Sheffield; 2004. URL: www​.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg14 (accessed July 2014).
3.
Evans DG, Howell A. Breast cancer risk-assessment models. Breast Cancer Res 2007;9:213. 10.1186/bcr1750. [PMC free article: PMC2242652] [PubMed: 17888188] [CrossRef]
4.
King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB, New York Breast Cancer Study Group. Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science 2003;302:643–6. 10.1126/science.1088759. [PubMed: 14576434] [CrossRef]
5.
Evans DG, Shenton A, Woodward E, Lalloo F, Howell A, Maher ER. Penetrance estimates for BRCA1 and BRCA2 based on genetic testing in a Clinical Cancer Genetics service setting: risks of breast/ovarian cancer quoted should reflect the cancer burden in the family. BMC Cancer 2008;8:155. 10.1186/1471-2407-8-155. [PMC free article: PMC2447846] [PubMed: 18513387] [CrossRef]
6.
Evans DG. The new genetics: prediction and prevention of breast cancer. Adv Breast Cancer 2006;3:71–5.
7.
Howell A, Sims AH, Ong KR, Harvie MN, Evans DG, Clarke RB. Mechanisms of disease: prediction and prevention of breast cancer-cellular and molecular interactions. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2005;2:635–46. 10.1038/ncponc0361. [PubMed: 16341119] [CrossRef]
8.
Easton DF, Pooley KA, Dunning AM, Pharoah PD, Thompson D, Ballinger DG, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nature 2007;447:1087–93. 10.1038/nature05887. [PMC free article: PMC2714974] [PubMed: 17529967] [CrossRef]
9.
Hunter DJ, Kraft P, Jacobs KB, Cox DG, Yeager M, Hankinson SE, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies alleles in FGFR2 associated with risk of sporadic postmenopausal breast cancer. Nat Genet 2007;39:870–4. 10.1038/ng2075. [PMC free article: PMC3493132] [PubMed: 17529973] [CrossRef]
10.
Stacey SN, Manolescu A, Sulem P, Rafnar T, Gudmundsson J, Gudjonsson SA, et al. Common variants on chromosomes 2q35 and 16q12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Nat Genet 2007;39:865–9. 10.1038/ng2064. [PubMed: 17529974] [CrossRef]
11.
Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med 2004;23:1111–30. 10.1002/sim.1668. [PubMed: 15057881] [CrossRef]
12.
Lalloo F, Evans DG. Familial breast cancer. Clin Genet 2012;82:105–14. 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2012.01859.x. [PubMed: 22356477] [CrossRef]
13.
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 53,297 women with breast cancer and 100,239 women without breast cancer from 54 epidemiological studies. Lancet 1996;347:1713–27. 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90806-5. [PubMed: 8656904] [CrossRef]
14.
Steinberg KK, Thacker SB, Smith J, Stroup DF, Zack MM, Flanders WD, et al. A meta-analysis of the effect of estrogen replacement therapy on the risk of breast cancer. JAMA 1991;265:1985–90. 10.1001/jama.1991.03460150089030. [PubMed: 1826136] [CrossRef]
15.
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy: collaborative reanalysis of data from 51 epidemiological studies of 52,705 women with breast cancer and 108,411 women without breast cancer. Lancet 1997;350:1047–59. 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08233-0. [PubMed: 10213546] [CrossRef]
16.
Ross RK, Paganini-Hill A, Wan PC, Pike MC. Effect of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk: estrogen versus estrogen plus progestin. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:328–32. 10.1093/jnci/92.4.328. [PubMed: 10675382] [CrossRef]
17.
Schairer C, Lubin J, Troisi R, Sturgeon S, Brinton L, Hoover R. Menopausal estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. JAMA 2000;283:485–91. 10.1001/jama.283.4.485. [PubMed: 10659874] [CrossRef]
18.
Writing Group for the Women’s Health Initiative Investigators. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women. JAMA 2002;288:321–33. 10.1001/jama.288.3.321. [PubMed: 12117397] [CrossRef]
19.
Beral V, Million Women Study Collaborators. Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Lancet 2003;362:419–27. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14596-5. [PubMed: 12927427] [CrossRef]
20.
Antoniou AC, Shenton A, Maher ER, Watson E, Woodward E, Lalloo F, et al. Parity and breast cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res 2006;8:R72. 10.1186/bcr1630. [PMC free article: PMC1797022] [PubMed: 17187672] [CrossRef]
21.
Andrieu N, Goldgar DE, Easton DF, Rookus M, Brohet R, Antoniou AC, et al. Pregnancies, breast-feeding, and breast cancer risk in the International BRCA12 Carrier Cohort Study (IBCCS). J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:535–44. 10.1093/jnci/djj132. [PMC free article: PMC2094011] [PubMed: 16622123] [CrossRef]
22.
Amir E, Freedman OC, Seruga B, Evans DG. Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:680–91. 10.1093/jnci/djq088. [PubMed: 20427433] [CrossRef]
23.
Wolfe JN. Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. AJR AM J Roentgenology 1976;126:1130–7. 10.2214/ajr.126.6.1130. [PubMed: 179369] [CrossRef]
24.
Wolfe JN. Risk for breast cancer development determined by mammographic parenchymal pattern. Cancer 1976;35:2486–92. 10.1002/1097-0142(197605)37:5<2486::AID-CNCR2820370542>3.0.CO;2-8. [PubMed: 1260729] [CrossRef]
25.
Boyd NF, O’Sullivan B, Fishell E, Simor I, Cooke G. Mammographic signs as risk factors for breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1982;45:185–93. 10.1038/bjc.1982.32. [PMC free article: PMC2010892] [PubMed: 7059469] [CrossRef]
26.
Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, Fishell EK, Little LE, Miller AB, et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:670–5. 10.1093/jnci/87.9.670. [PubMed: 7752271] [CrossRef]
27.
Eccles SA, Aboagye EO, Ali S, Anderson AS, Armes J, Berditchevski F, et al. Critical research gaps and translational priorities for the successful prevention and treatment of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2013;15:R92. 10.1186/bcr3493. [PMC free article: PMC3907091] [PubMed: 24286369] [CrossRef]
28.
Zheng W, Long J, Gao YT, Li C, Zheng Y, Xiang YB, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies a new breast cancer susceptibility locus at 6q25.1. Nat Genet 2009;41:324–8. 10.1038/ng.318. [PMC free article: PMC2754845] [PubMed: 19219042] [CrossRef]
29.
Pharoah PD, Antoniou AC, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Polygenes, risk prediction, and targeted prevention of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2796–803. 10.1056/NEJMsa0708739. [PubMed: 18579814] [CrossRef]
30.
Cox A, Dunning AM, Garcia-Closas M, Balasubramanian S, Reed MW, Pooley KA, et al. A common coding variant in CASP8 is associated with breast cancer risk. Nat Genet 2007;39:352–8. 10.1038/ng1981. [PubMed: 17293864] [CrossRef]
31.
Huang Z, Hankinson SE, Colditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Hunter DJ, Manson JE, et al. Dual effects of weight gain on breast cancer risk. JAMA 2000;278:1407–11. 10.1001/jama.1997.03550170037029. [PubMed: 9355998] [CrossRef]
32.
Harvie M, Hooper, Howell A. Central obesity and breast cancer risk: a systematic review. Obes Rev 2003;4:157–73. 10.1046/j.1467-789X.2003.00108.x. [PubMed: 12916817] [CrossRef]
33.
McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;15:1159–69. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0034. [PubMed: 16775176] [CrossRef]
34.
Chen J, Pee D, Ayyagari R, Graubard B, Schairer C, Byrne C, et al. Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1215–26. 10.1093/jnci/djj332. [PubMed: 16954474] [CrossRef]
35.
Barlow WE, White E, Ballard-Barbash R, Vacek PM, Titus-Ernstoff L, Carney PA, et al. Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1204–14. 10.1093/jnci/djj331. [PubMed: 16954473] [CrossRef]
36.
Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlilowske K. Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:337–47. 10.7326/0003-4819-148-5-200803040-00004. [PMC free article: PMC2674327] [PubMed: 18316752] [CrossRef]
37.
Kaufhold J, Thomas JA, Eberhard JW, Galbo CE, Gonzalez Trotter DE. A calibration approach to glandular tissue composition estimation in digital mammography. Med Phys 2002;29:1867–80. 10.1118/1.1493215. [PubMed: 12201434] [CrossRef]
38.
Rosman DS, Kaklamani V, Pasche B. New insights into breast cancer genetics and impact on patient management. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2007;8:61–73. 10.1007/s11864-007-0021-5. [PMC free article: PMC2670199] [PubMed: 17634833] [CrossRef]
39.
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. NHS Economic Evaluation Database Handbook (NHS EED). York: University of York; 2007.
40.
Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Golder S. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:355–71. 10.2165/00019053-200624040-00006. [PubMed: 16605282] [CrossRef]
41.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal (Reference N0515). London: NICE; 2004.
42.
Newman B, Austin MA, Lee M, King M. Inheritance of human breast cancer: evidence for autosomal dominant transmission in high-risk families. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1988;85:3044–8. 10.1073/pnas.85.9.3044. [PMC free article: PMC280139] [PubMed: 3362861] [CrossRef]
43.
Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early onset breast cancer. Cancer 1994;73:643–51. 10.1002/1097-0142(19940201)73:3<643::AID-CNCR2820730323>3.0.CO;2-5. [PubMed: 8299086] [CrossRef]
44.
Lichtenstein P, Holm NV, Verkasalo PK, Lliadou A, Kaprio J, Koskenvuo M, et al. Environmental and heritable factors in the causation of cancer analyses of cohorts of twins from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. N Engl J Med 2000;343:78–85. 10.1056/NEJM200007133430201. [PubMed: 10891514] [CrossRef]
45.
Peto J, Mack TM. High constant incidence in twins and other relatives of women with breast cancer. Nat Genet 2000;26:411–14. 10.1038/82533. [PubMed: 11101836] [CrossRef]
46.
Liaw D, Marsh DJ, Li J, Dahia PL, Wang SI, Zheng Z, et al. Germline mutations of the PTEN gene in Cowden disease, an inherited breast and thyroid cancer syndrome. Nat Genet 1997;16:64–7. 10.1038/ng0597-64. [PubMed: 9140396] [CrossRef]
47.
Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens D, Futreal PA, Harshman K, Tavtigian S, et al. A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer gene BRCA1. Science 1994;266:66–71. 10.1126/science.7545954. [PubMed: 7545954] [CrossRef]
48.
Wooster R, Bignell G, Lancaster J, Swift S, Seal S, Mangion J, et al. Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2. Nature 1995:378;789–92. 10.1038/378789a0. [PubMed: 8524414] [CrossRef]
49.
Malkin D, Li FP, Strong LC, JF Fraumeni Jr, CE Nelson, DH Kim, et al. Germ line p53 mutations in a familial syndrome of breast cancer, sarcomas, and other neoplasms. Science 1990;250:1233–8. 10.1126/science.1978757. [PubMed: 1978757] [CrossRef]
50.
Scott RJ, McPhillips M, Meldrum CJ, Fitzgerald PE, Adams K, Spigelman AD, et al. Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer in 95 families: differences and similarities between mutation-positive and mutation-negative kindreds. Am J Hum Genet 2001;68:118–27. 10.1086/316942. [PMC free article: PMC1234904] [PubMed: 11112663] [CrossRef]
51.
Meijers-Heijboer H, Wijnen J, Vasen H, Wasielewski M, Wagner A, Hollestelle A, et al. The CHEK2 1100delC mutation identifies families with a hereditary breast and colorectal cancer phenotype. Am J Hum Genet 2003;72:1308–14. 10.1086/375121. [PMC free article: PMC1180284] [PubMed: 12690581] [CrossRef]
52.
Evans DGR, Fentiman IS, McPherson K, Asbury D, Ponder BAJ, Howell A. Familial breast cancer. Brit Med J 1994;308:183–7. 10.1136/bmj.308.6922.183. [PMC free article: PMC2542527] [PubMed: 8312772] [CrossRef]
53.
Dupont WD, Page DL. Relative risk of breast cancer varies with time since diagnosis of atypical hyperplasia. Hum Pathol 1989;20:723–5. 10.1016/0046-8177(89)90063-4. [PubMed: 2744746] [CrossRef]
54.
Skolnick MH, Cannon-Albright LA, Goldgar DE, Ward JH, Marshall CJ, Schumann GB, et al. Inheritance of proliferative breast disease in breast cancer kindreds. Science 1990;250:1715–21. 10.1126/science.2270486. [PubMed: 2270486] [CrossRef]
55.
Freedman AN, Seminara D, Gail MH, Hartge P, Colditz GA, Ballard-Barbash R, et al. Cancer risk prediction models: a workshop on development, evaluation, and application. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:715–23. 10.1093/jnci/dji128. [PubMed: 15900041] [CrossRef]
56.
Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA, et al. Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:358–66. 10.1093/jnci/93.5.358. [PubMed: 11238697] [CrossRef]
57.
Amir E, Evans DG, Shenton A, Lalloo F, Moran A, Boggis C, et al. Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme. J Med Genet 2003;40:807–14. 10.1136/jmg.40.11.807. [PMC free article: PMC1735317] [PubMed: 14627668] [CrossRef]
58.
Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Martin LJ, Knight JA, Byng JW, Yaffe MJ, et al. Mammographic densities and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1998;7:1133–44. 10.3233/bd-1998-103-412. [PubMed: 9865433] [CrossRef]
59.
Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Roddam A, Dorgan JF, Longcope C, et al. Body mass index, serum sex hormones, and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1218–26. 10.1093/jnci/djg022. [PubMed: 12928347] [CrossRef]
60.
Mitchell G, Antoniou AC, Warren R, Peock S, Brown J, Davies R, et al. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Res 2006;66:1866–72. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-3368. [PubMed: 16452249] [CrossRef]
61.
Cyrillic 3.0 pedigree software. URL: www​.exetersoftware.com​/cat/cyrillic/cyrillic.html (accessed 30 March 2004).
62.
Evans DGR, Lalloo F. Risk assessment and management of high risk familial breast cancer. J Med Genet 2002;39:865–71. 10.1136/jmg.39.12.865. [PMC free article: PMC1757211] [PubMed: 12471197] [CrossRef]
63.
Evans DGR, Kerr B, Lalloo F. Risk Estimation for Breast Cancer. In Evans DGR, Kerr B, Lalloo F, Friedman J, editors. Risk Assessment and Management In Cancer Genetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
64.
Ford D, Easton DF, Stratton M, Narod S, Goldgar D, Devilee P, et al. genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. Am J Hum Genet 1998;62:676–89. 10.1086/301749. [PMC free article: PMC1376944] [PubMed: 9497246] [CrossRef]
65.
World Health Organization (WHO). International Classification of Diseases. 10th edn. Geneva: WHO; 2010.
66.
Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research Vol II. The Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies (IARC) Scientific Publication No 82. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987. [PubMed: 3329634]
67.
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58 209 women with breast cancer and 101 986 women without the disease. Lancet 2001;358:1389–99. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06524-2. [PubMed: 11705483] [CrossRef]
68.
Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge. BOADICEA. URL: https://pluto.srl.cam.ac.uk/cgi-bin/bd2/v2/bd.cgi 2010 (accessed 9 August 2013).
69.
Antoniou AC, Cunningham AP, Peto J, Evans DG, Lalloo F, Narod SA. The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions. Br J Cancer 2008;98:2015. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604411. [PMC free article: PMC2361716] [PubMed: 18349832] [CrossRef]
70.
Norman RP, Evans DG, Easton DF, Young KC. The cost-utility of magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers aged 30–49. Eur J Health Econ 2007;8:137–44. 10.1007/s10198-007-0042-9. [PubMed: 17347845] [CrossRef]
71.
Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57:75–89. 10.3322/canjclin.57.2.75. [PubMed: 17392385] [CrossRef]
72.
Evans DGR, Lennard F, Pointon LJ, Ramus SJ, Gayther SA, Sodha N, et al. On behalf of The UK study of MRI screening for breast cancer in women at high risk (MARIBS). Eligibility for MRI screening in the UK: effect of strict selection criteria and anonymous DNA testing on breast cancer incidence in the MARIBS study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:2123–31. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0138. [PMC free article: PMC2869031] [PubMed: 19567506] [CrossRef]
73.
Ozanne EM, Drohan B, Bosinoff P, Semine A, Jellinek M, Cronin C, et al. Which risk model to use? Clinical implications of the ACSMRI screening guidelines. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2013;22:146–9. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0570. [PubMed: 23093547] [CrossRef]
74.
Jacobi CE, de Bock GH, Siegerink B, van Asperen CJ. Differences and similarities in breast cancer risk assessment models in clinical practice: which model to choose? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009;115:381–90. 10.1007/s10549-008-0070-x. [PubMed: 18516672] [CrossRef]
75.
Quante AS, Whittemore AS, Shriver T, Strauch K, Terry MB. Breast cancer risk assessment across the risk continuum: genetic and nongenetic risk factors contributing to differential model performance. Breast Cancer Res 2012;14:R144. 10.1186/bcr3352. [PMC free article: PMC4053132] [PubMed: 23127309] [CrossRef]
76.
van Asperen CJ, Jonker MA, Jacobi CE, van Diemen-Homan JE, Bakker E, Breuning MH, et al. Risk estimation for healthy women from breast cancer families: new insights and new strategies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:87–93. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-03-0090. [PubMed: 14744738] [CrossRef]
77.
Ingham SL, Warwick J, Buchan I, Sahin S, O’Hara C, Moran A, et al. Ovarian cancer among 8005 women from a breast cancer family history clinic: no increased risk of invasive ovarian cancer in families testing negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Med Genet 2013;50:368–72. 10.1136/jmedgenet-2013-101607. [PubMed: 23539753] [CrossRef]
78.
Einbeigi Z, Enerbäck C, Wallgren A, Nordling M, Karlsson P. BRCA1 gene mutations may explain more than 80% of excess number of ovarian cancer cases after breast cancer – a population based study from the Western Sweden Health Care region. Acta Oncol 2010;49:361–7. 10.3109/02841860903521095. [PubMed: 20151938] [CrossRef]
79.
Kauff ND, Mitra N, Robson ME, Hurley KE, Chuai S, Goldfrank D, et al. Risk of ovarian cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation-negative hereditary breast cancer families. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1382–4. 10.1093/jnci/dji281. [PubMed: 16174860] [CrossRef]
80.
Meindl A, Hellebrand H, Wiek C, Erven V, Wappenschmidt B, Niederacher D, et al. Germline mutations in breast and ovarian cancer pedigrees establish RAD51C as a human cancer susceptibility gene. Nat Genet 2010;42:410–14. 10.1038/ng.569. [PubMed: 20400964] [CrossRef]
81.
Loveday C, Turnbull C, Ramsay E, Hughes D, Ruark E, Frankum JR, et al. Germline mutations in RAD51D confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 2011;43:879–82. 10.1038/ng.893. [PMC free article: PMC4845885] [PubMed: 21822267] [CrossRef]
82.
Ligtenberg MJ, Kuiper RP, Chan TL, Goossens M, Hebeda KM, Voorendt M, et al. Heritable somatic methylation and inactivation of MSH2 in families with Lynch syndrome due to deletion of the 3′ exons of TACSTD1. Nat Genet 2009;41:112–17. 10.1038/ng.283. [PubMed: 19098912] [CrossRef]
83.
Gerhardus A, Schleberger H, Schlegelberger B, Gadzicki D. Diagnostic accuracy of methods for the detection of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 2007;15:619–27. 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201806. [PubMed: 17342152] [CrossRef]
84.
Evans DGR, Eccles DM, Rahman N, Young K, Bulman M, Amir E, et al. A new scoring system for the chances of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation outperforms existing models including BRCAPRO. J Med Genet 2004;41:474–80. 10.1136/jmg.2003.017996. [PMC free article: PMC1735807] [PubMed: 15173236] [CrossRef]
85.
Evans GR, Lalloo F. Development of a scoring system to screen for BRCA1/2 mutations. Methods Mol Biol 2010;653:237–47. 10.1007/978-1-60761-759-4_14. [PubMed: 20721747] [CrossRef]
86.
Smith A, Moran A, Boyd MC, Bulman M, Shenton A, Smith L, et al. Phenocopies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: evidence for modifier genes and implications for screening. J Med Genet 2007;44:10–15. 10.1136/jmg.2006.043091. [PMC free article: PMC2597903] [PubMed: 17079251] [CrossRef]
87.
Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Phys Med Biol 1994;39:1629–38. 10.1088/0031-9155/39/10/008. [PubMed: 15551535] [CrossRef]
88.
Vachon CM, Brandt KR, Ghosh K, Scott CG, Maloney SD, Carston MJ, et al. Mammographic breast density as a general marker of breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:43–9. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0738. [PubMed: 17220330] [CrossRef]
89.
Evans DG, Ingham S, Dawe S, Roberts L, Lalloo F, Brentnall AR, et al. Breast cancer risk assessment in 8,824 women attending a family history evaluation and screening programme. Fam Cancer 2014;13:189–96. 10.1007/s10689-013-9694-z. [PubMed: 24276527] [CrossRef]
90.
Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Genetic analysis of breast cancer in the cancer and steroid hormone study. Am J Hum Genet 1991;48:232–42. [PMC free article: PMC1683001] [PubMed: 1990835]
91.
Anderson DE, Badzioch MD. Familial breast cancer risks. Effects of prostate and other cancers. Cancer 1993;72:114–19. 10.1002/1097-0142(19930701)72:1<114::AID-CNCR2820720122>3.0.CO;2-0. [PubMed: 8508396] [CrossRef]
92.
Peto J, Collins N, Barfoot R, Seal S, Warren W, Rahman N, et al. Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in patients with early-onset breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:943–9. 10.1093/jnci/91.11.943. [PubMed: 10359546] [CrossRef]
93.
Neuhausen SL, Marshall CJ. Loss of heterozygosity in familial tumors from three BRCA1-linked kindreds. Cancer Res 1994;54:6069–72. [PubMed: 7954448]
94.
Collins N, McManus R, Wooster R, Mangion J, Seal S, Lakhani SR, et al. Consistent loss of the wild type allele in breast cancers from a family linked to the BRCA2 gene on chromosome 13q12–13. Oncogene 1995;10:1673–5. [PubMed: 7731724]
95.
Anglian Breast Cancer Study Group. Prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population-based series of breast cancer cases. Br J Cancer 2000;83:1301–8. 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1407. [PMC free article: PMC2408797] [PubMed: 11044354] [CrossRef]
96.
Thompson D, Easton DF. Cancer incidence in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1358–65. 10.1093/jnci/94.18.1358. [PubMed: 12237281] [CrossRef]
97.
Hall JM, Lee MK, Newman B, Morrow JE, Anderson LA, Huey B, et al. Linkage of early-onset familial breast cancer to chromosome 17q21. Science 1990;250:1684–9. 10.1126/science.2270482. [PubMed: 2270482] [CrossRef]
98.
Easton DF, Bishop DT, Ford D, Crockford GP. Genetic linkage analysis in familial breast and ovarian cancer: results from 214 families. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Am J Hum Genet 1993;52:678–701. [PMC free article: PMC1682082] [PubMed: 8460634]
99.
Wooster R, Neuhausen SL, Mangion J, Quirk Y, Ford D, Collins N, et al. Localization of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA2, to chromosome 13q12–13. Science 1994;265:2088–90. 10.1126/science.8091231. [PubMed: 8091231] [CrossRef]
100.
Tavtigian SV, Simard J, Rommens J, Couch F, Shattuck-Eidens D, Neuhausen S, et al. The complete BRCA2 gene and mutations in chromosome 13q-linked kindreds. Nat Genet 1996;12:333–7. 10.1038/ng0396-333. [PubMed: 8589730] [CrossRef]
101.
Srivastava S, Zou ZQ, Pirollo K, Blattner W, Chang EH. Germ-line transmission of a mutated p53 gene in a cancer-prone family with Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Nature 1990;348:747–9. 10.1038/348747a0. [PubMed: 2259385] [CrossRef]
102.
Garber JE, Goldstein AM, Kantor AF, Dreyfus MG, Fraumeni JF Jr, Li FP. Follow-up study of twenty-four families with Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Cancer Res 1991;51:6094–7. [PubMed: 1933872]
103.
Lalloo F, Varley J, Ellis D, O’Dair L, Pharoah P, Evans DGR, et al. Family history is predictive of pathogenic mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 and TP53 with high penetrance in a population based study of very early onset breast cancer. Lancet 2003;361:1101–2. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12856-5. [PubMed: 12672316] [CrossRef]
104.
Hearle N, Schumacher V, Menko FH, Olschwang S, Boardman LA, Gille JJ, et al. Frequency and spectrum of cancers in the Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:3209–15. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0083. [PubMed: 16707622] [CrossRef]
105.
Pharoah PD, Guilford P, Caldas C. Incidence of gastric cancer and breast cancer in CDH1 (E-cadherin) mutation carriers from hereditary diffuse gastric cancer families. Gastroenterology 2001;121:1348–53. 10.1053/gast.2001.29611. [PubMed: 11729114] [CrossRef]
106.
Smith P, McGuffog L, Easton DF, Mann GJ, Pupo GM, Newman B, et al. A genome wide linkage search for breast cancer susceptibility genes. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2006;45:646–55. 10.1002/gcc.20330. [PMC free article: PMC2714969] [PubMed: 16575876] [CrossRef]
107.
Antoniou AC, Pharoah PD, McMullan G, Day NE, Ponder BA, Easton D. Evidence for further breast cancer susceptibility genes in addition to BRCA1 and BRCA2 in a population-based study. Genet Epidemiol 2001;21:1–18. 10.1002/gepi.1014. [PubMed: 11443730] [CrossRef]
108.
Evans DG. Genetic predisposition and breast screening. In Benson JR, Gui G, Tuttle TM, editors. Early Breast Cancer: From Screening to Multidisciplinary Management. 3rd edn. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2013. pp. 17–27.
109.
Meijers-Heijboer H, van den Ouweland A, Klijn J, Wasielewski M, de Snoo A, Oldenburg R, et al. Low-penetrance susceptibility to breast cancer due to CHEK2(*)1100delC in noncarriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Nat Genet 2002;31:55–9. 10.1038/ng879. [PubMed: 11967536] [CrossRef]
110.
Ahn J, Urist M, Prives C. The Chk2 protein kinase. DNA Repair (Amst) 2004;3:1039–47. 10.1016/j.dnarep.2004.03.033. [PubMed: 15279791] [CrossRef]
111.
Gatti RA, Berkel I, Boder E, Braedt G, Charmley P, Concannon P, et al. Localization of an ataxia-telangiectasia gene to chromosome 11q22–23. Nature 1988;336:577–80. 10.1038/336577a0. [PubMed: 3200306] [CrossRef]
112.
Savitsky K, Bar-Shira A, Gilad S, Rotman G, Ziv Y, Vanagaite L, Tagle DA, et al. A single ataxia telangiectasia gene with a product similar to PI-3 kinase. Science 1995;268:1749–53. 10.1126/science.7792600. [PubMed: 7792600] [CrossRef]
113.
Shiloh Y. The ATM-mediated DNA-damage response: taking shape. Trends Biochem Sci 2006;31:402–10. 10.1016/j.tibs.2006.05.004. [PubMed: 16774833] [CrossRef]
114.
Renwick A, Thompson D, Seal S, Kelly P, Chagtai T, Ahmed M, et al. ATM mutations that cause ataxia-telangiectasia are breast cancer susceptibility alleles. Nat Genet 2006;38:873–5. 10.1038/ng1837. [PubMed: 16832357] [CrossRef]
115.
Cantor SB, Bell DW, Ganesan S, Kass EM, Drapkin R, Grossman S, et al. BACH1, a novel helicase-like protein, interacts directly with BRCA1 and contributes to its DNA repair function. Cell 2001;105:149–60. 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00304-X. [PubMed: 11301010] [CrossRef]
116.
Peng M, Litman R, Jin Z, Fong G, Cantor SB. BACH1 is a DNA repair protein supporting BRCA1 damage response. Oncogene 2006;25:2245–53. 10.1038/sj.onc.1209257. [PubMed: 16462773] [CrossRef]
117.
Seal S, Thompson D, Renwick A, Elliott A, Kelly P, Barfoot R, et al. Truncating mutations in the Fanconi anemia J gene BRIP1 are low-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility alleles. Nat Genet 2006;38:1239–41. 10.1038/ng1902. [PubMed: 17033622] [CrossRef]
118.
Howlett NG, Taniguchi T, Olson S, Cox B, Waisfisz Q, De Die-Smulders C, et al. Biallelic inactivation of BRCA2 in Fanconi anemia. Science 2002;297:606–9. 10.1126/science.1073834. [PubMed: 12065746] [CrossRef]
119.
Levitus M, Waisfisz Q, Godthelp BC, de Vries Y, Hussain S, Wiegant WW, et al. The DNA helicase BRIP1 is defective in Fanconi anemia complementation group. J Nat Genet 2005;37:934–5. 10.1038/ng1625. [PubMed: 16116423] [CrossRef]
120.
Reid S, Schindler D, Hanenberg H, Barker K, Hanks S, Kalb R, et al. Biallelic mutations in PALB2 cause Fanconi anemia subtype FA-N and predispose to childhood cancer. Nat Genet 2007;39:162–4. 10.1038/ng1947. [PubMed: 17200671] [CrossRef]
121.
Rahman N, Seal S, Thompson D, Kelly P, Renwick A, Elliott A, et al. PALB2, which encodes a BRCA2-interacting protein, is a breast cancer susceptibility gene. Nat Genet 2007;39:165–7. 10.1038/ng1959. [PMC free article: PMC2871593] [PubMed: 17200668] [CrossRef]
122.
Stratton MR, Rahman N. The emerging landscape of breast cancer susceptibility. Nat Genet 2008;40:17–22. 10.1038/ng.2007.53. [PubMed: 18163131] [CrossRef]
123.
Sharif S, Moran A, Huson SM, Iddenden R, Shenton A, Howard E, et al. Women with Neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1) are at a moderately increased risk of developing breast cancer and should be considered for early screening. J Med Genet 2007;44:481–4. 10.1136/jmg.2007.049346. [PMC free article: PMC2597938] [PubMed: 17369502] [CrossRef]
124.
Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Commonly studied single-nucleotide polymorphisms and breast cancer: results from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1382–96. 10.1093/jnci/djj374. [PubMed: 17018785] [CrossRef]
125.
Gold B, Kirchhoff T, Stefanov S, Lautenberger J, Viale A, Garber J, et al. Genome-wide association study provides evidence for a breast cancer risk locus at 6q22.33. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:4340–5. 10.1073/pnas.0800441105. [PMC free article: PMC2393811] [PubMed: 18326623] [CrossRef]
126.
Stacey SN, Manolescu A, Sulem P, Thorlacius S, Gudjonsson SA, Jonsson GF, et al. Common variants on chromosome 5p12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Nat Genet 2008;40:703–6. 10.1038/ng.131. [PubMed: 18438407] [CrossRef]
127.
Fletcher O, Johnson N, Gibson L, Coupland B, Fraser A, Leonard A, et al. Association of genetic variants at 8q24 with breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17:702–5. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2564. [PubMed: 18349290] [CrossRef]
128.
Garcia-Closas M, Chanock S. Genetic susceptibility loci for breast cancer by estrogen receptor status. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:8000–9. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0975. [PMC free article: PMC2668137] [PubMed: 19088016] [CrossRef]
129.
Meyer KB, Maia AT, O’Reilly M, Teschendorff AE, Chin SF, Caldas C, et al. Allele-specific up-regulation of FGFR2 increases susceptibility to breast cancer. PLOS Biol 2008;6:e108. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060108. [PMC free article: PMC2365982] [PubMed: 18462018] [CrossRef]
130.
Ahmed S, Thomas G, Ghoussaini M, Healey CS, Humphreys MK, Platte R, et al. Newly discovered breast cancer susceptibility loci on 3p24 and 17q23.2. Nat Genet 2009;41:585–90. 10.1038/ng.354. [PMC free article: PMC2748125] [PubMed: 19330027] [CrossRef]
131.
Turnbull C, Ahmed S, Morrison J, Pernet D, Renwick A, Maranian M, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies five new breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nat Genet 2010;42:504–7. 10.1038/ng.586. [PMC free article: PMC3632836] [PubMed: 20453838] [CrossRef]
132.
Melchor L, Benitez J. The complex genetic landscape of familial breast cancer. Hum Genet 2013;132:845–63. 10.1007/s00439-013-1299-y. [PubMed: 23552954] [CrossRef]
133.
Michailidou K, Hall P, Gonzalez-Neira A, Ghoussaini M, Dennis J, Milne RL, et al. Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nat Genet 2013;45:353–61. 10.1038/ng.2563. [PMC free article: PMC3771688] [PubMed: 23535729] [CrossRef]
134.
Sakoda LC, Jorgenson E, Witte JS. Turning of COGS moves forward findings for hormonally mediated cancers. Nat Genet 2013;45:345–8. 10.1038/ng.2587. [PubMed: 23535722] [CrossRef]
135.
Latif A, Hadfield KD, Roberts SA, Shenton A, Lalloo F, Black GC, et al. Breast cancer susceptibility variants alter risks in familial disease. J Med Genet 2010;47:126–31. 10.1136/jmg.2009.067256. [PubMed: 19617217] [CrossRef]
136.
Antoniou AC, Beesley J, McGuffog L, Sinilnikova OM, Healey S, Neuhausen SL, et al. Common breast cancer susceptibility alleles and the risk of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: implications for risk prediction. Cancer Res 2010;70:9742–54. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1907. [PMC free article: PMC2999830] [PubMed: 21118973] [CrossRef]
137.
Antoniou AC, Kartsonaki C, Sinilnikova OM, Soucy P, McGuffog L, Healey S, et al. Common alleles at 6q25.1 and 1p11.2 are associated with breast cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Hum Mol Genet 2011;20:3304–21. 10.1093/hmg/ddr226. [PMC free article: PMC3652640] [PubMed: 21593217] [CrossRef]
138.
Nelson W. Hazard plotting for incomplete failure data. J Qual Technol 1969;1:27–52.
139.
Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables. J Roy Stat Soc B Met 1972;34:187–220.
140.
Ingham SL, Warwick J, Byers H, Lalloo F, Newman WG, Evans DG. Is multiple SNP testing in BRCA2 and BRCA1 female carriers ready for use in clinical practice? Results from a large genetic centre in the UK. Clin Genet 2013;84:37–42. 10.1111/cge.12035. [PubMed: 23050611] [CrossRef]
141.
Evans DGR, Warwick J, Astley SM, Stavrinos P, Sahin S, Ingham S, et al. Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Program: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res 2012;5:943–51. 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-11-0458. [PubMed: 22581816] [CrossRef]
142.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Familial Breast Cancer: Classification and Care of People at Risk of Familial Breast Cancer and Management of Breast Cancer and Related Risks in People with a Family History of Breast Cancer. NICE guideline CG164. London: National Collaborating Centre for Cancer; 2013. URL: http://publications​.nice​.org.uk/familial-breast-cancer-cg164 (accessed 20 September 2013). [PubMed: 25340237]
143.
Chen S, Iversen ES, Friebel T, Finkelstein D, Weber BL, Eisen A, et al. Characterization of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a large United States sample. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:863–71. 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.6772. [PMC free article: PMC2323978] [PubMed: 16484695] [CrossRef]
144.
Warner E, Foulkes W, Goodwin P, Meschino W, Blondal J, Paterson C, et al. Prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in unselected Ashkenazi Jewish women with breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1241–7. 10.1093/jnci/91.14.1241. [PubMed: 10413426] [CrossRef]
145.
Hopper JL, Southey MC, Dite GS, Jolley DJ, Giles GG, McCredie MR, et al. Population-based estimate of the average age-specific cumulative risk of breast cancer for a defined set of protein-truncating mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Australian Breast Cancer Family Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8:741–7. [PubMed: 10498392]
146.
Evans DG, Lalloo F, Ashcroft L, Shenton A, Clancy T, Baildam AD, et al. Uptake of risk reducing surgery in unaffected women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer is risk, age and time dependent. Cancer Epid Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:2318–24. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0171. [PubMed: 19661091] [CrossRef]
147.
Mealiffe ME, Stokowski RP, Rhees BK, Prentice RL, Pettinger M, Hinds DA. Assessment of clinical validity of a breast cancer risk model combining genetic and clinical information. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:1618–27. 10.1093/jnci/djq388. [PMC free article: PMC2970578] [PubMed: 20956782] [CrossRef]
148.
Comen E, Balistreri L, Gönen M, Dutra-Clarke A, Fazio M, Vijai J, et al. Discriminatory accuracy and potential clinical utility of genomic profiling for breast cancer risk in BRCA-negative women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011;127:479–87. 10.1007/s10549-010-1215-2. [PMC free article: PMC3310430] [PubMed: 20957429] [CrossRef]
149.
Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Schairer C, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989;81:1879–86. 10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879. [PubMed: 2593165] [CrossRef]
150.
Costantino JP, Gail MH, Pee D, Anderson S, Redmond CK, Benichou J, et al. Validation studies for models projecting the risk of invasive and total breast cancer incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1541–8. 10.1093/jnci/91.18.1541. [PubMed: 10491430] [CrossRef]
151.
Gail MH. Value of adding single-nucleotide polymorphism genotypes to a breast cancer risk model. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:959–63. 10.1093/jnci/djp130. [PMC free article: PMC2704229] [PubMed: 19535781] [CrossRef]
152.
Evans DG, Ingham SL, Buchan I, Woodward ER, Byers H, Howell A, et al. Increased rate of phenocopies in all age groups in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation kindred, but increased prospective breast cancer risk is confined to BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2013;22:2269–76. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-0316-T. [PubMed: 24285840] [CrossRef]
153.
Howell A, Astley S, Warwick J, Stavrinos P, Sahin S, Ingham S, et al. Prevention of breast cancer in the context of a national breast screening programme. J Intern Med 2012;271:321–30. 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2012.02525.x. [PubMed: 22292490] [CrossRef]
154.
Brentnall AR, Evans DG, Cuzick J. Distribution of breast cancer risk from SNPs and classical risk factors in women of routine screening age in the UK. Br J Cancer 2014;110:827–8. 10.1038/bjc.2013.747. [PMC free article: PMC3915120] [PubMed: 24448363] [CrossRef]
155.
Brentnall AR, Evans DG, Cuzick J. Value of phenotypic and single-nucleotide polymorphism panel markers in predicting the risk of breast cancer. J Genet Synd Gene Ther 2013;4:11.
156.
Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). Breast Screening Programme England 2011–2012 [NS]. URL: www​.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB10339 (accessed May 2014).
157.
Parkin DM, Boyd L, Walker LC. 16. The fraction of cancer attributable to lifestyle and environmental factors in the UK in 2010. Br J Cancer 2011;105(Suppl. 2):77–81. 10.1038/bjc.2011.489. [PMC free article: PMC3252065] [PubMed: 22158327] [CrossRef]
158.
World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. Continuous Update Project Report. Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Breast Cancer. 2010. URL: www​.dietandcancerreport​.org/cancer_resource_center​/downloads​/cu/Breast-Cancer-2010-Report.pdf (accessed May 2014).
159.
Gramling R, Lash TL, Rothman KJ, Cabral HJ, Silliman R, Roberts M, et al. Family history of later-onset breast cancer, breast healthy behavior and invasive breast cancer among postmenopausal women: a cohort study. Breast Cancer Res 2010;12:R82. 10.1186/bcr2727. [PMC free article: PMC3096975] [PubMed: 20939870] [CrossRef]
160.
Petracci E, Decarli A, Schairer C, Pfeiffer RM, Pee D, Masala G, et al. Risk factor modification and projections of absolute breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:1037–48. 10.1093/jnci/djr172. [PMC free article: PMC3131219] [PubMed: 21705679] [CrossRef]
161.
Catsburg C, Miller AB, Rohan TE. Adherence to cancer prevention guidelines and risk of breast cancer. Int J Cancer 2014;135:2444–52. 10.1002/ijc.28887. [PubMed: 24723234] [CrossRef]
162.
Harvie M, Howell A, Vierkant RA, Kumar N, Cerhan JR, Kelemen LE, et al. Association of gain and loss of weight before and after menopause with risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in the Iowa women’s health study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:656–61. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0001. [PubMed: 15767346] [CrossRef]
163.
Eliassen AH, Colditz GA, Rosner B, Willett WC, Hankinson SE. Adult weight change and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. JAMA 2006;296:193–201. 10.1001/jama.296.2.193. [PubMed: 16835425] [CrossRef]
164.
Teras LR, Goodman M, Patel AV, Diver WR, Flanders WD, Feigelson HS. Weight loss and postmenopausal breast cancer in a prospective cohort of overweight and obese US women. Cancer Causes Control 2011;22:573–9. 10.1007/s10552-011-9730-y. [PubMed: 21327461] [CrossRef]
165.
Cecchini RS, Costantino JP, Cauley JA, Cronin WM, Wickerham DL, Land SR, et al. Body mass index and the risk for developing invasive breast cancer among high-risk women in NSABP P-1 and STAR breast cancer prevention trials. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2012;5:583–92. 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-11-0482. [PMC free article: PMC4131545] [PubMed: 22318751] [CrossRef]
166.
Sickles EA, D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Appleton CM, Berg WA, Burnside ES. ACR BI-RADS® Mammography. In ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
167.
Duffy SW, Nagtegaal ID, Astley SM, Gillan MGC, McGee MA, Boggis CRM, et al. Visually assessed breast density, breast cancer risk and the importance of the craniocaudal view. Breast Cancer Res 2008;10:R64. 10.1186/bcr2123. [PMC free article: PMC2575537] [PubMed: 18651965] [CrossRef]
168.
Diffey J, Hufton A, Astley S. A New Step-Wedge for the Volumetric Measurement of Mammographic Density. In Astley S, Brady M, Rose C, Zwiggelaar R, editors. Digital Mammography 8th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2006. pp. 1–9. 10.1007/11783237_1. [CrossRef]
169.
Pawluczyk O, Augustine BJ, Yaffe MJ, Rico D, Yang J, Mawdsley GE. A volumetric method for estimation of breast density in digitised screen-film mammograms. Med Phys 2003;30:352–64. 10.1118/1.1539038. [PubMed: 12674236] [CrossRef]
170.
Highnam RP, Brady M. Mammographic Image Analysis (Computational Imaging and Vision). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1999. 10.1007/978-94-011-4613-5. [CrossRef]
171.
Jeffreys M, Harvey J, Highnam R. Comparing a New Volumetric Breast Density Method (VolparaTM) to Cumulus. In Martí J, Oliver A, Freixenet J, Martí R, editors. Digital Mammography 10th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2010. pp. 408–13.
172.
Highnam R, Brady M, Yaffe MJ, Karssemeijer N, Harvey J. Robust Breast Composition Measurement – VolparaTM. In Martí J, Oliver A, Freixenet J, Martí R, editors. Digital Mammography 10th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2010. pp. 342–9.
173.
Ciatto S, Bernadi D, Calabrese M, Durando M, Gentilini MA, Mariscotti G, et al. A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification. Breast 2012;21:503–6. 10.1016/j.breast.2012.01.005. [PubMed: 22285387] [CrossRef]
174.
Wang J, Azziz A, Fan B, Malkov S, Klifa C, Newitt D, et al. Agreement of mammographic measures of volumetric breast density to MRI. PLOS ONE 2013;8:e8165. 10.1371/journal.pone.0081653. [PMC free article: PMC3852736] [PubMed: 24324712] [CrossRef]
175.
Kontos D, Bakic PR, Acciavatti RJ, Conant EF, Maidment ADA. A Comparative Study of Volumetric and Area-Based Breast Density Estimation in Digital Mammography. Results from a Screening Population. In Martí J, Oliver A, Freixenet J, Martí R, editors. Digital Mammography 10th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2010. pp. 378–85.
176.
Euhus DM, Leitch AM, Huth JF, Peters GN. Limitations of the Gail model in the specialized breast cancer risk assessment clinic. Breast 2002;8:23–7. 10.1046/j.1524-4741.2002.08005.x. [PubMed: 11856157] [CrossRef]
177.
Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. The calculation of breast cancer risk for women with a first degree family history of ovarian cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1993;28:115–20. 10.1007/BF00666424. [PubMed: 8173064] [CrossRef]
178.
McTiernan A, Kuniyuki A, Yasui Y, Bowen D, Burke W, Culver JB, et al. Comparisons of two breast cancer risk estimates in women with a family history of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:333–8. [PubMed: 11319173]
179.
McGuigan KA, Ganz PA, Breant C: Agreement between breast cancer risk estimation methods. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:1315–17. 10.1093/jnci/88.18.1315. [PubMed: 8797772] [CrossRef]
180.
Tischkowitz M, Wheeler D, France E, Chapman C, Lucassen A, Sampson J, et al. A comparison of methods currently used in clinical practice to estimate familial breast cancer risks. Ann Oncol 2000;11:451–4. 10.1023/A:1008396129543. [PubMed: 10847465] [CrossRef]
181.
Parmigiani G, Berry DA, Aquilar O. Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet 1998;62:145–8. 10.1086/301670. [PMC free article: PMC1376797] [PubMed: 9443863] [CrossRef]
182.
Antoniou AC, Pharoah PP, Smith P, Easton DF. The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer 2004;91:1580–90. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602175. [PMC free article: PMC2409934] [PubMed: 15381934] [CrossRef]
183.
Simard J, Dumont M, Moisan AM, Gaborieau V, Malouin H, Durocher F, et al. Evaluation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation prevalence, risk prediction models and a multistep testing approach in French-Canadian families with high risk of breast and ovarian cancer. J Med Genet 2007;44:107–21. 10.1136/jmg.2006.044388. [PMC free article: PMC2598057] [PubMed: 16905680] [CrossRef]
184.
Public Health England. Local Obesity Prevalence. URL: www​.noo.org.uk/LA/obesity_prev (accessed May 2014).
185.
Cancer Research UK. Breast Cancer Statistics. URL: www​.cancerresearchuk​.org/cancer-info/cancerstats​/types/breast/?script=true (accessed May 2014).
186.
Department for Communities and Local Government. English Indices of Deprivation 2010. URL: www​.gov.uk/government​/uploads/system/uploads​/attachment_data/file/6871/1871208​.pdf.
187.
Evans DGR, Burnell LD, Hopwood P, Howell A. Perception of risk in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1993;67:612–14. 10.1038/bjc.1993.112. [PMC free article: PMC1968271] [PubMed: 8439512] [CrossRef]
188.
Evans DGR, Blair V, Greenhalgh R, Hopwood P, Howell A. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1994;70:934–8. 10.1038/bjc.1994.423. [PMC free article: PMC2033538] [PubMed: 7947100] [CrossRef]
189.
Hopwood P, Shenton A, Lalloo F, Evans DGR, Howell A. Risk perception and cancer worry: an exploratory study of the impact of genetic risk counselling in women with a family history of breast cancer. J Med Genet 2001;38:139. 10.1136/jmg.38.2.139. [PMC free article: PMC1734804] [PubMed: 11288719] [CrossRef]
190.
Evans DGR, Brentnall AR, Harvie M, Dawe S, Sergeant JC, Stavrinos P, et al. Breast cancer risk in young women in the National Breast Screening Programme: implications for applying NICE guidelines for additional screening and chemoprevention. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2014;7:993–1001. 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-14-0037. [PubMed: 25047362] [CrossRef]
191.
Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, Gillan MG, Agbaje OF, Wallis MG, James J, et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1675–84. 10.1056/NEJMoa0803545. [PubMed: 18832239] [CrossRef]
192.
Malkov S, Wang J, Kerlikowske K, Cummings SR, Shepherd JA. Single X-ray absorptiometry method for the quantitative mammographic measure of fibroglandular tissue volume. Med Phys 2009;36:5525–36. 10.1118/1.3253972. [PMC free article: PMC2789112] [PubMed: 20095265] [CrossRef]
193.
Sperrin M, Bardwell L, Sergeant JC, Astley S, Buchan I. Correcting for rater bias in scores on a continuous scale, with application to breast density. Stat Med 2013;32:4666–78. 10.1002/sim.5848. [PubMed: 23674384] [CrossRef]
194.
Van Engeland S, Snoeren PR, Huisman H, Boetes C, Karssemeijer N. Volumetric breast density estimation from full field digital mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25:273–82. 10.1109/TMI.2005.862741. [PubMed: 16524084] [CrossRef]
195.
Sergeant JC, Wilson M, Barr N, Beetles U, Boggis C, Bundred S, et al. Inter-observer agreement in visual analogue scale assessment of percentage breast density. Breast Cancer Res 2013;15(Suppl. 1):17. 10.1186/bcr3517. [CrossRef]
196.
Hashmi S, Sergeant JC, Morris J, Whiteside S, Stavrinos P, Evans DG, et al. Ethnic Variation in Volumetric Breast Density. In Maidment ADA, Bakic PR, Gavenonis S, editors. Breast Imaging 11th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2012. pp. 127–33. 10.1007/978-3-642-31271-7_17. [CrossRef]
197.
Beattie L, Harkness E, Bydder M, Sergeant J, Maxwell A, Barr N, et al. Factors Affecting Agreement Between Breast Density Assessment using Volumetric Methods and Visual Analogue Scales. In Fujita H, Hara T, Muramatsu C, editors. Breast Imaging 12th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2014. pp. 80–7. 10.1007/978-3-319-07887-8_12. [CrossRef]
198.
O’Donovan E, Sergeant J, Harkness E, Morris J, Wilson M, Lim Y, et al. Use of Volumetric Breast Density Measures for the Prediction of Weight and Body Mass Index. In Fujita H, Hara T, Muramatsu C, editors. Breast Imaging 12th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2014. pp. 282–9.
199.
NHS Musgrove Park Hospital. Somerset Cancer Registry. URL: www​.musgroveparkhospital​.nhs.uk/wards-and-departments​/departments-services​/somerset-cancer-register/ (accessed May 2014).
200.
Public Health England. North West Cancer Teams, National Cancer Registration Service and Cancer Knowledge and Intelligence. URL: www​.nwcis.nhs.uk/ (accessed May 2014).
201.
Patel HG, Astley SM, Hufton AP, Harvie M, Hagan K, Marchant TE, et al. Automated Breast Tissue Measurement of Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer. In Astley S, Brady M, Rose C, Zwiggelaar R, editors. Digital Mammography 8th International Workshop. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2006. pp. 131–6. 10.1007/11783237_19. [CrossRef]
202.
Sergeant JC, Walshaw L, Wilson M, Seed S, Barr N, Beetles U, et al. Same task, same observers, different values: the problem with visual assessment of breast density. Proc. SPIE 8673, Medical Imaging 2013: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 86730 T. URL: http://proceedings​.spiedigitallibrary​.org/proceeding​.aspx?articleid7673826 (accessed 28 March 2013).
203.
Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Sun L, Guo H, Chiarelli A, Hislop G, et al. Body size, mammographic density, and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:2086–92. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0345. [PubMed: 17119032] [CrossRef]
204.
Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, Stone J, Fishell E, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356:227–36. 10.1056/NEJMoa062790. [PubMed: 17229950] [CrossRef]
205.
Kerlikowske K, Ichikawa L, Miglioretti DL, Buist DSM, Vacek PM, Smith-Bindman R, et al. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:386–95. 10.1093/jnci/djk066. [PubMed: 17341730] [CrossRef]
206.
Diffey J, Hufton A, Astley S, Mercer C, Maxwell A. Estimating Individual Cancer Risks in the UK National Breast Screening Programme: A Feasibility Study. In Krupinski E, editor. 9th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2008. pp. 469–76. 10.1007/978-3-540-70538-3_65. [CrossRef]
207.
Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, Parekh N, Salane M, Brinton LA, et al. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1622–9. 10.1093/jnci/87.21.1622. [PubMed: 7563205] [CrossRef]
208.
Wolfe JN. Breast parenchymal patterns and their changes with age. Radiology 1976;121:545–52. 10.1148/121.3.545. [PubMed: 981644] [CrossRef]
209.
Boyd N, Martin L, Stone J, Little L, Minkin S, Yaffe M. A longitudinal study of the effects of menopause on mammographic features. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:1048–53. [PubMed: 12376506]
210.
Greendale GA, Reboussin BA, Slone S, Wasilauskas C, Pike MC, Ursin G. Postmenopausal hormone therapy and change in mammographic density. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:30–7. 10.1093/jnci/95.1.30. [PubMed: 12509398] [CrossRef]
211.
Rutter CM, Mandelson MT, Laya MB, Taplin S. Changes in breast density associated with initiation, discontinuation, and continuing use of hormone replacement therapy. JAMA 2001;285:171–6. 10.1001/jama.285.2.171. [PubMed: 11176809] [CrossRef]
212.
Manchester City Council. Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010: Analysis for Manchester. Corporate Research and Intelligence. URL: www​.manchester.gov.uk​/downloads/download​/414/research_and_intelligence​_population​_publications_deprivation (accessed 11 July 2013).
213.
Chlebowski RT, Chen Z, Anderson GL, Rohan T, Aragaki A, Lane D, et al. Ethnicity and breast cancer: factors influencing differences in incidence and outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:439–48. 10.1093/jnci/dji064. [PubMed: 15770008] [CrossRef]
214.
Smigal C, Jemal A, Ward E, Cokkinides V, Smith R, Howe HL, et al. Trends in breast cancer by race and ethnicity: update 2006. CA Cancer J Clin 2006;56:169–87. 10.3322/canjclin.56.3.168. [PubMed: 16737949] [CrossRef]
215.
Tzias D, George S, Wilkinson L, Mehta R, Lobo C, Hainsworth A, et al. Correlation of ethnicity with breast density as assessed by Quantra™. Breast Cancer Res 2011;13(Suppl. 1):O5. 10.1186/bcr2951. [CrossRef]
216.
El-Bastawissi AY, White E, Mandelson MT, Taplin S. Variation in mammographic breast density by race. Ann Epidemiol 2001;11:257–63. 10.1016/S1047-2797(00)00225-8. [PubMed: 11306344] [CrossRef]
217.
Chen Z, Wu AH, Gauderman WJ, Bernstein L, Ma H, Pike MC, et al. Does mammographic density reflect ethnic differences in breast cancer incidence rates? Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:140–7. 10.1093/aje/kwh028. [PubMed: 14718215] [CrossRef]
218.
Turnbull AE, Kapera L, Cohen MEL. Mammographic parenchymal pattern in Asian and Caucasian women attending for screening. Clin Radiol 1993;48:38–40. 10.1016/S0009-9260(05)80105-9. [PubMed: 8370218] [CrossRef]
219.
del Carmen MG, Hughes KS, Halpern E, Rafferty E, Kopans D, Parisky YR, et al. Racial differences in mammographic breast density. Cancer 2003;98:590–6. 10.1002/cncr.11517. [PubMed: 12879477] [CrossRef]
220.
Hartman K, Highnam R, Warren R, Jackson V. Volumetric Assessment of Breast Tissue Composition from FFDM Images. In Krupinski E, editor. 9th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2008. pp. 33–9. 10.1007/978-3-540-70538-3_5. [CrossRef]
221.
Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, Gilliland FD, Wiest PW, Kelsey CA, et al. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology 1998;209:511–18. 10.1148/radiology.209.2.9807581. [PubMed: 9807581] [CrossRef]
222.
Struewing JP, Hartge P, Wacholder S, Baker SM, Berlin M, McAdams M, et al. The risk of cancer associated with specific mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 among Ashkenazi Jews. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1401–8. 10.1056/NEJM199705153362001. [PubMed: 9145676] [CrossRef]
223.
Goel MS, Wee CC, McCarthy EP, Davis RB, Ngo-Metzger Q, Phillips RS. Racial and ethnic disparities in cancer screening: the importance of foreign birth as a barrier to care. J Gen Intern Med 2003;18:1028–35. 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2003.20807.x. [PMC free article: PMC1494963] [PubMed: 14687262] [CrossRef]
224.
Nutine L, Sergeant JC, Morris J, Stavrinos P, Evans DG, Howell T, et al. Volumetric and Area-Based Measures of Mammographic Density in Women With and Without Cancer. In Maidment ADA, Bakic PR, Gavenonis S, editors. Breast Imaging 11th International Workshop. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2012. pp. 589–95. 10.1007/978-3-642-31271-7_76. [CrossRef]
225.
Ellison-Loschmann L, McKenzie F, Highnam R, Cave A, Walker J, Jeffreys M. Age and ethnic differences in volumetric breast density in New Zealand women: a cross-sectional study. PLOS ONE 2013;8:e70217. 10.1371/journal.pone.0070217. [PMC free article: PMC3729838] [PubMed: 23936166] [CrossRef]
226.
Rowland ML. Self-reported weight and height. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;52:1125–33. [PubMed: 2239790]
227.
Jinnan G, Warren R, Warren-Forward H, Forbes JF. Reproducibility of visual assessment on mammographic density. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008;108:121–7. 10.1007/s10549-007-9581-0. [PubMed: 17616811] [CrossRef]
228.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;327:307–10. 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8. [PubMed: 2868172] [CrossRef]
229.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8:135–60. 10.1191/096228099673819272. [PubMed: 10501650] [CrossRef]
230.
Cuzick J, Warwick J, Pinney E, Duffy SW, Cawthorn S, Howell A, et al. Tamoxifen-induced reduction in mammographic density and breast cancer risk reduction: a nested case–control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:744–52. 10.1093/jnci/djr079. [PubMed: 21483019] [CrossRef]
231.
Astley S, Swayamprakasam C, Berks M, Sergeant J, Morris J, Wilson M, et al. Assessment of change in breast density: reader performance using synthetic mammographic images. Proc. SPIE 8318, Medical Imaging 2012: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 831810. 2012;810–31.
232.
National Cancer Institute. Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool. URL: www​.cancer.gov/bcrisktool/ (accessed May 2014).
233.
Boyd NF, Dite GS, Stone J, Gunasekara A, English DR, McCredie MR, et al. Heritability of mammographic density, a risk factor for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:886–94. 10.1056/NEJMoa013390. [PubMed: 12239257] [CrossRef]
234.
Pankow JS, Vachon CM, Kuni CC, King RA, Arnett DK, Grabrick DM, et al. Genetic analysis of mammographic breast density in adult women: evidence of a gene effect. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:549–56. 10.1093/jnci/89.8.549. [PubMed: 9106643] [CrossRef]
235.
Santen R, Boyd N, Chlebowski RT, Cummings S, Cuzick J, Dowsett M, et al. Critical assessment of new risk factors for breast cancer: considerations for development of an improved risk prediction model. Endocr Relat Cancer 2007;14:169–87. 10.1677/ERC-06-0045. [PubMed: 17639036] [CrossRef]
236.
Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2005.
237.
Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. BMC Med 2013;11:80. 10.1186/1741-7015-11-80. [PMC free article: PMC3607979] [PubMed: 23531108] [CrossRef]
238.
Karnon J, Goyder E, Tappenden P, McPhie S, Towers I, Brazier J, et al. A review and critique of modelling in prioritising and designing screening programmes. Health Technol Assess 2007;11(52). 10.3310/hta11520. [PubMed: 18031651] [CrossRef]
239.
Ahern CH, Shen Y. Cost-effectiveness analysis of mammography and clinical breast examination strategies: a comparison with current guidelines. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:718–25. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0918. [PMC free article: PMC2716399] [PubMed: 19258473] [CrossRef]
240.
Arveux P, Wait S, Schaffer P. Building a model to determine the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening in France. Eur J Cancer Care 2003;12:143–53. 10.1046/j.1365-2354.2003.00373.x. [PubMed: 12787012] [CrossRef]
241.
Baker RD. Use of a mathematical model to evaluate breast cancer screening policy. Health Care Manage Sci 1998;1:103–13. 10.1023/A:1019046619402. [PubMed: 10916589] [CrossRef]
242.
Boer R, de Koning HJ, van Oortmarssen GJ, van der Maas PJ. In search of the best upper age limit for breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 1995;31:2040–43. 10.1016/0959-8049(95)00457-2. [PubMed: 8562162] [CrossRef]
243.
Boer R, de Koning H, Threlfall A, Warmerdam P, Street A, Friedman E, et al. Cost effectiveness of shortening screening interval or extending age range of NHS breast screening programme: computer simulation study. BMJ 1998;317:376–9. 10.1136/bmj.317.7155.376. [PMC free article: PMC28630] [PubMed: 9694752] [CrossRef]
244.
Boer R, de Koning HJ, van der Maas PJ. A longer breast carcinoma screening interval for women age older than 65 years? Cancer 1999;86:1506–10. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19991015)86:8<1506::AID-CNCR17>3.0.CO;2-2. [PubMed: 10526279] [CrossRef]
245.
Brancato B, Bonardi R, Catarzi S, Iacconi C, Risso G, Taschini R, et al. Negligible advantages and excess costs of routine addition of breast ultrasonography to mammography in dense breasts. Tumori 2007;93:562–6. [PubMed: 18338490]
246.
Brown J, Bryan S, Warren R. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms. BMJ 1996;312:809–12. 10.1136/bmj.312.7034.809. [PMC free article: PMC2350705] [PubMed: 8608287] [CrossRef]
247.
Bryan S, Brown J, Warren R. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of two view versus one view procedures in London. J Epidemiol Community Health 1995;49:70–8. 10.1136/jech.49.1.70. [PMC free article: PMC1060078] [PubMed: 7707010] [CrossRef]
248.
Burnside E, Belkora J, Esserman L. The impact of alternative practices on the cost and quality of mammographic screening in the United States. Clinical Breast Cancer 2001;2:145–52. 10.3816/CBC.2001.n.019. [PubMed: 11899786] [CrossRef]
249.
Cairns J, van der Pol M. Cost-effectiveness of non-consensus double reading. Breast 1998;7:243–6. 10.1016/S0960-9776(98)90088-1. [CrossRef]
250.
Carles M, Vilaprinyo E, Cots F, Gregori A, Pla R, Román R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of early detection of breast cancer in Catalonia (Spain). BMC Cancer 2011;11:192. 10.1186/1471-2407-11-192. [PMC free article: PMC3125279] [PubMed: 21605383] [CrossRef]
251.
Caumo F, Brunelli S, Tosi E, Teggi S, Bovo C, Bonavina G, et al. On the role of arbitration of discordant double readings of screening mammography: experience from two Italian programmes. Radiol Med 2011;116:84–91. 10.1007/s11547-010-0606-0. [PubMed: 20981500] [CrossRef]
252.
Ciatto S, Del Turco MR, Morrone D, Catarzi S, Ambrogetti D, Cariddi A, et al. Independent double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screen 1995;2:99–101. [PubMed: 7497164]
253.
Clarke PR, Fraser NM. Economic Analysis of Screening for Breast Cancer: Report for Scottish Home and Health Department. Edinburgh: Scottish office; 1991. pp. 1–99.
254.
Clarke PM. Cost–benefit analysis and mammographic screening: a travel cost approach. J Health Econ 1998;17:767–87. 10.1016/S0167-6296(98)00031-9. [PubMed: 10339252] [CrossRef]
255.
De Gelder R, Bulliard J, de Wolf C, Fracheboud J, Draisma G, Schopper D, et al. Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic versus organised mammography screening in Switzerland. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:127–38. 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.09.015. [PubMed: 19038540] [CrossRef]
256.
De Koning HJ, van Ineveld BM, van Oortmarssen GJ, de Haes JC, Collette HJ, Hendriks JH, et al. Breast cancer screening and cost-effectiveness; policy alternatives, quality of life considerations and the possible impact of uncertain factors. Int J Cancer 1991;49:531–7. 10.1002/ijc.2910490410. [PubMed: 1917154] [CrossRef]
257.
Feig SA. Mammographic screening of women aged 40–49 years. Benefit, risk, and cost considerations. Cancer 1995;76(Suppl.):2097–106. 10.1002/1097-0142(19951115)76:10+<2097::AID-CNCR2820761332>3.0.CO;2-B. [PubMed: 8635007] [CrossRef]
258.
Garuz R, Forcen T, Cabases J, Antonanzas F, Trinxet C, Rovira J, et al. Economic evaluation of a mammography-based breast cancer screening programme in Spain. Eur J Public Health 1997;7:68–76. 10.1093/eurpub/7.1.68. [CrossRef]
259.
Groenewoud JH, Otten JDM, Fracheboud J, Draisma G, van Ineveld BM, Holland R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of different reading and referral strategies in mammography screening in the Netherlands. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007;102:211–18. 10.1007/s10549-006-9319-4. [PubMed: 17004116] [CrossRef]
260.
Gyrd-hansen D. Cost–benefit analysis of mammography screening in Denmark based on discrete ranking data. Int J Technol Assess Healthcare 2000;3:811–21. 10.1017/S0266462300102089. [PubMed: 11028136] [CrossRef]
261.
Guerriero C, Gillan MGC, Cairns J, Wallis MG, Gilbert FJ. Is computer aided detection (CAD) cost effective in screening mammography? A model based on the CADET II study. BMC Health Serv Res 2011;11:11. 10.1186/1472-6963-11-11. [PMC free article: PMC3032650] [PubMed: 21241473] [CrossRef]
262.
Hall J, Gerard K, Salkeld G, Richardson J. A cost utility analysis of mammography screening in Australia. Soc Sci Med 1992;34:993–1004. 10.1016/0277-9536(92)90130-I. [PubMed: 1631612] [CrossRef]
263.
Henderson LM, Hubbard RA, Onega TL, Zhu W, Buist DSM, Fishman P, et al. Assessing health care use and cost consequences of a new screening modality: the case of digital mammography. Med Care 2012;50:1045–52. 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318269e0d1. [PMC free article: PMC3650634] [PubMed: 22922432] [CrossRef]
264.
Hunter DJW, Drake SM, Shortt SED, Dorland JL, Tran N. Simulation modeling of change to breast cancer detection age eligibility recommendations in Ontario, 2002–2021. Cancer Detect Prev 2004;28:453–60. 10.1016/j.cdp.2004.08.003. [PubMed: 15582269] [CrossRef]
265.
Johnston K, Brown J. Two view mammography at incident screens: cost effectiveness analysis of policy options. BMJ 1999;319:1097–102. 10.1136/bmj.319.7217.1097. [PMC free article: PMC28259] [PubMed: 10531098] [CrossRef]
266.
Kang MH, Park E-C, Choi KS, Suh M, Jun JK, Cho E. The National Cancer Screening Program for breast cancer in the Republic of Korea: is it cost-effective? Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013;14:2059–65. 10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.3.2059. [PubMed: 23679319] [CrossRef]
267.
Kerlikowske K. Continuing screening mammography in women aged 70 to 79 years: impact on life expectancy and cost-effectiveness. JAMA 1999;282:2156–63. 10.1001/jama.282.22.2156. [PubMed: 10591338] [CrossRef]
268.
Lee SY, Jeong SH, Kim YN, Kim J, Kang DR, Kim H-C, et al. Cost-effective mammography screening in Korea: high incidence of breast cancer in young women. Cancer Sci 2009;100:1105–11. 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01147.x. [PubMed: 19320639] [CrossRef]
269.
Leivo T, Salminen T, Sintonen H, Tuominen R, Auermo K, Partanen K, et al. Incremental cost-effectiveness of double-reading mammograms. Br Cancer Res Treat 1999;54:261–7. 10.1023/A:1006136107092. [PubMed: 10445425] [CrossRef]
270.
Leivo T, Sintonen H, Tuominen R, Hakama M, Pukkala E, Heinonen OP. The cost-effectiveness of nationwide breast carcinoma screening in Finland, 1987–1992. Cancer 1999;86:638–46. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990815)86:4<638::AID-CNCR12>3.0.CO;2-H. [PubMed: 10440691] [CrossRef]
271.
Lindfors KK, Rosenquist CJ. The cost-effectiveness of mammographic screening strategies. JAMA 1995;274:881–4. 10.1001/jama.1995.03530110043033. [PubMed: 7674501] [CrossRef]
272.
Lindfors KK, McGahan MC, Rosenquist CJ, Hurlock GS. Computer-aided detection of breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness study. Radiology 2006;239:710–17. 10.1148/radiol.2392050670. [PubMed: 16569787] [CrossRef]
273.
Madan J, Rawdin A, Stevenson M, Tappenden P. A rapid-response economic evaluation of the UK NHS Cancer Reform Strategy breast cancer screening program extension via a plausible bounds approach. Value Health, 2010;13:215–21. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00667.x. [PubMed: 19878494] [CrossRef]
274.
Mandelblatt JS, Schechter CB, Yabroff KR, Lawrence W, Dignam J, Extermann M, et al. Toward optimal screening strategies for older women. Costs, benefits, and harms of breast cancer screening by age, biology, and health status. J Gen Inter Med 2005;20:487–96. 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0116.x. [PMC free article: PMC1490138] [PubMed: 15987322] [CrossRef]
275.
Melnikow J, Tancredi DJ, Yang Z, Ritley D, Jiang Y, Slee C, et al. Program-specific cost-effectiveness analysis: breast cancer screening policies for a safety-net program. Value Health?2013;16:932–41. 10.1016/j.jval.2013.06.013. [PubMed: 24041343] [CrossRef]
276.
Mooney G. Breast cancer screening. A study in cost-effectiveness analysis. Soc Sci Med 1982;16:1277–83. 10.1016/0277-9536(82)90071-5. [PubMed: 6813972] [CrossRef]
277.
Moskowitz M, Fox SH. Cost analysis of aggressive breast cancer screening. Radiology 1979;130:253–6. 10.1148/130.1.253. [PubMed: 103136] [CrossRef]
278.
Moskowitz M. Cost–benefit determinations in screening mammography. Cancer 1987;60(Suppl. 7):1680–3. 10.1002/1097-0142(19871001)60:1+<1680::AID-CNCR2820601206>3.0.CO;2-W. [PubMed: 3115556] [CrossRef]
279.
Moss SM, Brown J, Garvican L, Coleman DA, Johns LE, Blanks RG, et al. Routine breast screening for women aged 65–69: results from evaluation of the demonstration sites. Br J Cancer 2001;85:1289–94. 10.1054/bjoc.2001.2047. [PMC free article: PMC2375256] [PubMed: 11720462] [CrossRef]
280.
Neeser K, Szucs T, Bulliard J-L, Bachmann G, Schramm W. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a quality-controlled mammography screening program from the Swiss statutory health-care perspective: quantitative assessment of the most influential factors. Value Health 2007;10:42–53. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00143.x. [PubMed: 17261115] [CrossRef]
281.
Nguyen LH, Laohasiriwong W, Stewart JF, Wright P, Nguyen YTB, Coyte PC. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a screening program for breast cancer in Vietnam. Value Health Regional Issues 2013;2:21–8. 10.1016/j.vhri.2013.02.004. [PubMed: 29702847] [CrossRef]
282.
Norum J. Breast cancer screening by mammography in Norway. Is it cost-effective? Ann Oncol 1999;10:197–203. 10.1023/A:1008376608270. [PubMed: 10093689] [CrossRef]
283.
Nutting PA, Calonge BN, Iverson DC, Green LA. The danger of applying uniform clinical policies across populations: the case of breast cancer in American Indians. Am J Public Health 1994;84:1631–6. 10.2105/AJPH.84.10.1631. [PMC free article: PMC1615100] [PubMed: 7943483] [CrossRef]
284.
Ohnuki K, Kuriyama S, Shoji N, Nishino Y, Tsuji I, Ohuchi N. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening modalities for breast cancer in Japan with special reference to women aged 40–49 years. Cancer Sci 2006;97:1242–7. 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2006.00296.x. [PubMed: 16918992] [CrossRef]
285.
Okonkwo QL, Draisma G, der Kinderen A, Brown ML, de Koning HJ. Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis for India. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:1290–300. 10.1093/jnci/djn292. [PubMed: 18780864] [CrossRef]
286.
Okubo I, Glick H, Frumkin H, Eisenberg JM. Cost-effectiveness analysis of mass screening for breast cancer in Japan. Cancer 1991;67:2021–9. 10.1002/1097-0142(19910415)67:8<2021::AID-CNCR2820670802>3.0.CO;2-L. [PubMed: 1900734] [CrossRef]
287.
Pharoah PDP, Sewell B, Fitzsimmons D, Bennett HS, Pashayan N. Cost effectiveness of the NHS breast screening programme: life table model. BMJ 2013;346:f2618. 10.1136/bmj.f2618. [PMC free article: PMC3649817] [PubMed: 23661112] [CrossRef]
288.
Rojnik K, Naveršnik K, Mateovic T. Probabilistic Cost-effectiveness modeling of different breast cancer screening policies in Slovenia. Value Health 2008;11:139–48. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00223.x. [PubMed: 18380626] [CrossRef]
289.
Rosenquist CJ, Lindfors KK. Screening mammography in women aged 40–49 years: analysis of cost-effectiveness. Radiology 1994;191:647–50. 10.1148/radiology.191.3.8184041. [PubMed: 8184041] [CrossRef]
290.
Rosenquist CJ, Lindfors KK. Screening mammography beginning at age 40 years: a reappraisal of cost-effectiveness. Cancer 1998;82:2235–40. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980601)82:11<2235::AID-CNCR19>3.0.CO;2-V. [PubMed: 9610704] [CrossRef]
291.
Salzmann P, Kerlikowske K, Phillips K. Cost-effectiveness of extending screening mammography guidelines to include women 40 to 49 years of age. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:1013–22. 10.7326/0003-4819-127-11-199712010-00001. [PubMed: 9412300] [CrossRef]
292.
Schousboe JT, Kerlikowske K, Loh A, Cummings SR. personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness. Ann Intern Med 2011;155:10–20. 10.7326/0003-4819-155-1-201107050-00003. [PMC free article: PMC3759993] [PubMed: 21727289] [CrossRef]
293.
Shen Y, Parmigiani G. A model-based comparison of breast cancer screening strategies: mammograms and clinical breast examinations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarker Prev 2005;14:529–32. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0499. [PubMed: 15734983] [CrossRef]
294.
Souza FH, Polanczyk CA. Is age-targeted full-field digital mammography screening cost-effective in emerging countries? A micro simulation model. Springerplus 2013;2:366. 10.1186/2193-1801-2-366. [PMC free article: PMC3736082] [PubMed: 23961428] [CrossRef]
295.
Stout NK, Rosenberg MA, Trentham-Dietz A, Smith MA, Robinson SM, Fryback DG. Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:774–82. 10.1093/jnci/djj210. [PubMed: 16757702] [CrossRef]
296.
Szeto KL, Devlin NJ. The cost-effectiveness of mammography screening: evidence from a microsimulation model for New Zeland. Health Policy 1996;38:101–15. 10.1016/0168-8510(96)00843-3. [PubMed: 10160378] [CrossRef]
297.
Taylor P, Champness J, Johnston K, Potts H. Impact of computer-aided detection prompts on screening mammography. Health Technol Assess 2005;9(6). 10.3310/hta9060. [PubMed: 15717938] [CrossRef]
298.
Tosteson ANA, Stout NK, Fryback DG, Acharyya S, Herman BA, Hannah LG, et al. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography breast cancer screening. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:1–10. 10.7326/0003-4819-148-1-200801010-00002. [PMC free article: PMC2662630] [PubMed: 18166758] [CrossRef]
299.
Van Dyck W, Gassull D, Vértes G, Jain P, Palaniappan M, Schulthess D, et al. Unlocking the value of personalised healthcare in Europe – breast cancer stratification. Health Policy Technol 2012;1:63–8. 10.1016/j.hlpt.2012.04.006. [CrossRef]
300.
Van Ineveld BM, van Oortmarssen GJ, de Koning HJ, Boer R, van der Maas PJ. How cost-effective is breast cancer screening in different EC countries? Eur J Cancer 1993;29A:1663–8. 10.1016/0959-8049(93)90100-T. [PubMed: 8398290] [CrossRef]
301.
Wald NJ, Murphy P, Major P, Parkes C, Townsend J, Frost C. UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening. BMJ 1995;311:1189–93. 10.1136/bmj.311.7014.1189. [PMC free article: PMC2551114] [PubMed: 7488893] [CrossRef]
302.
Wang S, Merlin T, Kreisz F, Craft P, Hiller JE. Cost and cost-effectiveness of digital mammography compared with film-screen mammography in Australia. Aust N Z J Public Health 2009;33:430–6. 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2009.00424.x. [PubMed: 19811478] [CrossRef]
303.
Warmerdam PG, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Beemsterboer PM, Dierks ML, Swart E, et al. Quantitative estimates of the impact of sensitivity and specificity in mammographic screening in Germany. J Epidemiol Community Health 1997;51:180–6. 10.1136/jech.51.2.180. [PMC free article: PMC1060442] [PubMed: 9196649] [CrossRef]
304.
Wong IOL, Kuntz KM, Cowling BJ, Lam CLK, Leung GM. Cost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese women. Cancer 2007;110:885–95. 10.1002/cncr.22848. [PubMed: 17607668] [CrossRef]
305.
Wong IOL, Kuntz, Cowling BJ, Lam CL, Leung GM. Cost-effectiveness analysis of mammography screening in Hong Kong Chinese using state-transition Markov modelling. Hong Kong Med J 2010;16(Suppl. 3):38–41. [PubMed: 20601733]
306.
Wong IOL, Tsang JWH, Cowling BJ, Leung GM. Optimizing resource allocation for breast cancer prevention and care among Hong Kong Chinese women. Cancer 2012;118:4394–403. 10.1002/cncr.27448. [PubMed: 22359352] [CrossRef]
307.
Woo PPS, Kim JJ, Leung GM. What is the most cost-effective population-based cancer screening program for Chinese women? J Clin Oncol 2007;25:617–24. 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.0210. [PubMed: 17308266] [CrossRef]
308.
Zelle SG, Nyarko KM, Bosu WK, Aikins M, Niëns LM, Lauer JA, et al. Costs, effects and cost-effectiveness of breast cancer control in Ghana. Trop Med Int Health 2012;17:1031–43. 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2012.03021.x. [PubMed: 22809238] [CrossRef]
309.
Zelle SG, Vidaurre T, Abugattas JE, Manrique JE, Sarria G, Jeronimo J, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of breast cancer control interventions in Peru. PLOS ONE 2013;8:e82575. 10.1371/journal.pone.0082575. [PMC free article: PMC3859673] [PubMed: 24349314] [CrossRef]
310.
Tan KHX, Simonella L, Wee HL, Roellin A, Lim Y-W, Lim W-Y, et al. Quantifying the natural history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2013;109:2035–43. 10.1038/bjc.2013.471. [PMC free article: PMC3798948] [PubMed: 24084766] [CrossRef]
311.
National Cancer Institute. Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET). URL: http://cisnet​.cancer.gov/profiles (accessed 27 June 2014).
312.
Australian Department of Health and Ageing. Breastscreen Australia Evaluation: Economic Evaluation and Modelling Study. Canberra, ACT: 2009. URL: www​.cancerscreening.gov​.au/internet/screening/publishing​.nsf​/Content/E158C94C6D5FA028CA25762A00029B8A/$File/Econ%20Eval​.pdf (accessed May 2014).
313.
Drummond M, Barbieri M, Cook J, Glick HA, Lis J, Malik F, et al. Transferability of economic evaluations across jurisdictions: ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force Report. Value Health 2009;12:409–18. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00489.x. [PubMed: 19900249] [CrossRef]
314.
Eddy DM, et al. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices Task Force-7. Value Health 2012;15:843–50. 10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.012. [PubMed: 22999134] [CrossRef]
315.
Vanni T, Karnon J, Madan J, White RG, Edmunds WJ, Foss AM, Legood R. Calibrating models in economic evaluation: a seven-step approach. PharmacoEconomics 2011;29:35–49. 10.2165/11584600-000000000-00000. [PubMed: 21142277] [CrossRef]
316.
Buxton MJ, Drummond MF, Van Hout BA, Prince RL, Sheldon TA, Szucs T, et al. Modelling in ecomomic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Econ 1997;6:217–27. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199705)6:3<217::AID-HEC267>3.0.CO;2-W. [PubMed: 9226140] [CrossRef]
317.
Van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD, Lubbe JT, van der Maas PJ. A model-based analysis of the HIP project for breast cancer screening. Int J Cancer 1990;46:207–13. 10.1002/ijc.2910460211. [PubMed: 2384271] [CrossRef]
318.
Office for National Statistics (ONS). Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 2013 Provisional Results. ONS; 2013. URL: www​.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_335027.pdf (accessed May 2014).
319.
HM Revenue & Customs. Company Cars – Advisory Fuel Rates from 1 June 2014. URL: www​.hmrc.gov.uk/cars​/advisory_fuel_current.htm (accessed May 2014).
320.
Forrest P. Breast Cancer Screening: Report to the Health Ministers of England, Wales, Scotland & Northern Ireland. 1986. URL: www​.cancerscreening.nhs​.uk/breastscreen/publications​/forrest-report.pdf (accessed May 2014).
321.
Office for National Statistics (ONS). Cancer Statistics Registrations, England (Series MB1), No. 42. ONS; 2011. URL: www​.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel​/vsob1/cancer-statistics-registrations--england--series-mb1-​/no-–42-–2011/index​.html (accessed May 2014).
322.
Fryback DG, Stout NK, Rosenberg MA, Trentham-Dietz A, Kuruchittham V, Remington PL. The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2006;36:37–47. 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj007. [PubMed: 17032893] [CrossRef]
323.
Office for National Statistics (ONS). Death Registrations Summary Tables, England and Wales. ONS: 2012. URL: www​.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications​/re-reference-tables​.html?edition=tcm​%3A77–314473 (accessed May 2014).
324.
National Cancer Intelligence Network. Improved Survival for Screen-Detected Breast Cancer. URL: www​.ncin.org.uk/publications​/data_briefings​/improved_survival​_for_screen_detected_breast_cancer (accessed May 2014).
325.
Dolan P, Torgerson DJ, Wolstenholme J. Costs of breast cancer treatment in the United Kingdom. Breast 1999;8:205–7. 10.1054/brst.1999.0035. [PubMed: 14731442] [CrossRef]
326.
Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK Population Norms for EQ-5D (No. 172). York: Centre for Health Economics; 1999: pp. 1–98.
327.
Peasgood T, Ward SE, Brazier J. Health-state utility values in breast cancer. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2010;10:553–66. 10.1586/erp.10.65. [PubMed: 20950071] [CrossRef]
328.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Methods Guide for Technology Appraisals. London: NICE; 2013.
329.
Annemans L, Redekop K, Payne K. Current methodological issues in the economic assessment of personalized medicine. Value Health 2013;16:s20–6. 10.1016/j.jval.2013.06.008. [PubMed: 24034308] [CrossRef]
330.
Cho SH, Jeon J, Kim SI. Personalized medicine in breast cancer: a systematic review. J Breast Cancer 2012;15:265–72. 10.4048/jbc.2012.15.3.265. [PMC free article: PMC3468779] [PubMed: 23091538] [CrossRef]
331.
Duffy S, Tabar L, Olsen AH, Vitak B, Allgood PC, Chen TH, et al. Absolute numbers of lives saved and overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening, from a randomized trial and from the Breast Screening Programme in England. J Med Screen 2010;17:25–30. 10.1258/jms.2009.009094. [PMC free article: PMC3104821] [PubMed: 20356942] [CrossRef]
332.
Barton P, Bryan S, Robinson S. Modelling in the economic evaluation of health care: selecting the appropriate approach. J Health Serv Res Policy 2004;9:110–18. 10.1258/135581904322987535. [PubMed: 15099459] [CrossRef]
333.
Tan SYGL, van Oortmarssen GJ, de Koning HJ, Boer R, Habbema JDF. The MISCAN-Fadia continuous tumor growth model for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2006;36:56–65 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj009. [PubMed: 17032895] [CrossRef]
Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2016. This work was produced by Evans et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.

Included under terms of UK Non-commercial Government License.

Bookshelf ID: NBK379490
Contents

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (8.8M)

Other titles in this collection

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

ClearTurn OffTurn On

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...