% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Giardiello:154473,
      author       = {D. Giardiello and M. Hauptmann and E. W. Steyerberg and M.
                      A. Adank and D. Akdeniz and J. C. Blom and C. Blomqvist and
                      S. E. Bojesen and M. K. Bolla and M. Brinkhuis and J.
                      Chang-Claude$^*$ and K. Czene and P. Devilee and A. M.
                      Dunning and D. F. Easton and D. M. Eccles and P. A. Fasching
                      and J. Figueroa and H. Flyger and M. García-Closas and L.
                      Haeberle and C. A. Haiman and P. Hall and U. Hamann$^*$ and
                      J. L. Hopper and A. Jager and A. Jakubowska and A. Jung$^*$
                      and R. Keeman and L. B. Koppert and I. Kramer and D.
                      Lambrechts and L. Le Marchand and A. Lindblom and J.
                      Lubiński and M. Manoochehri$^*$ and L. Mariani and H.
                      Nevanlinna and H. S. A. Oldenburg and S. Pelders and P. D.
                      P. Pharoah and M. Shah and S. Siesling and V. T. H. B. M.
                      Smit and M. C. Southey and W. J. Tapper and R. A. E. M.
                      Tollenaar and A. J. van den Broek and C. H. M. van Deurzen
                      and F. E. van Leeuwen and C. van Ongeval and L. J. Van't
                      Veer and Q. Wang and C. Wendt and P. J. Westenend and M. J.
                      Hooning and M. K. Schmidt},
      title        = {{P}rediction of contralateral breast cancer: external
                      validation of risk calculators in 20 international cohorts.},
      journal      = {Breast cancer research and treatment},
      volume       = {181},
      number       = {2},
      issn         = {1573-7217},
      address      = {Dordrecht [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Springer Science + Business Media B.V.},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2020-00795},
      pages        = {423-434},
      year         = {2020},
      note         = {2020 Jun;181(2):423-434},
      abstract     = {Three tools are currently available to predict the risk of
                      contralateral breast cancer (CBC). We aimed to compare the
                      performance of the Manchester formula, CBCrisk, and
                      PredictCBC in patients with invasive breast cancer (BC).We
                      analyzed data of 132,756 patients (4682 CBC) from 20
                      international studies with a median follow-up of 8.8 years.
                      Prediction performance included discrimination, quantified
                      as a time-dependent Area-Under-the-Curve (AUC) at 5 and
                      10 years after diagnosis of primary BC, and calibration,
                      quantified as the expected-observed (E/O) ratio at 5 and
                      10 years and the calibration slope.The AUC at 10 years
                      was: 0.58 $(95\%$ confidence intervals [CI] 0.57-0.59) for
                      CBCrisk; 0.60 $(95\%$ CI 0.59-0.61) for the Manchester
                      formula; 0.63 $(95\%$ CI 0.59-0.66) and 0.59 $(95\%$ CI
                      0.56-0.62) for PredictCBC-1A (for settings where BRCA1/2
                      mutation status is available) and PredictCBC-1B (for the
                      general population), respectively. The E/O at 10 years:
                      0.82 $(95\%$ CI 0.51-1.32) for CBCrisk; 1.53 $(95\%$ CI
                      0.63-3.73) for the Manchester formula; 1.28 $(95\%$ CI
                      0.63-2.58) for PredictCBC-1A and 1.35 $(95\%$ CI 0.65-2.77)
                      for PredictCBC-1B. The calibration slope was 1.26 $(95\%$ CI
                      1.01-1.50) for CBCrisk; 0.90 $(95\%$ CI 0.79-1.02) for
                      PredictCBC-1A; 0.81 $(95\%$ CI 0.63-0.99) for PredictCBC-1B,
                      and 0.39 $(95\%$ CI 0.34-0.43) for the Manchester
                      formula.Current CBC risk prediction tools provide only
                      moderate discrimination and the Manchester formula was
                      poorly calibrated. Better predictors and re-calibration are
                      needed to improve CBC prediction and to identify low- and
                      high-CBC risk patients for clinical decision-making.},
      cin          = {C020 / B072},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)C020-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)B072-20160331},
      pnm          = {319H - Addenda (POF3-319H)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-319H},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:32279280},
      doi          = {10.1007/s10549-020-05611-8},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/154473},
}