ArticleNature genetics2026
Improved polygenic risk prediction models for breast cancer subtypes in women of African ancestry.
Article in Nature genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical implementation of polygenic risk scores-updates on ancestry-adjusted PRS and their use in practice.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Breast cancer polygenic risk score performance varies by socioeconomic status.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Polygenic Risk Scores for Breast Cancer Among African American Women With High Risk.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Should Sickle Cell Disease Be Considered a Cancer Predisposition Syndrome?Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Improved polygenic risk prediction models for breast cancer subtypes in women of African ancestry.Nature genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
55 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polygenic risk score (PRS) models effectively predict breast cancer (BC) risk in European-ancestry women but have limited accuracy for African-ancestry women, particularly for aggressive subtypes. We developed PRS models for overall BC, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, ER-negative and triple-negative BC (TNBC) in African-ancestry women using data from the African Ancestry Breast Cancer Genetics consortium (17,391 cases and 18,800 controls). We applied several PRS methods and integrated information across ancestries and BC subtypes. The best models for overall, ER-positive, ER-negative and TNBC showed an area under the receiving operating curve of 0.612, 0.621, 0.611 and 0.639, respectively, and maintained predictive accuracy in external validation studies with area under the receiving operating curves of 0.612, 0.640, 0.605 and 0.652. We further introduce a parsimonious 162-variant PRS for TNBC with comparable accuracy (0.626). These findings demonstrate markedly improved PRS accuracy for BC risk prediction in African-ancestry women. Using these PRS models for screening will help promote more equitable cancer prevention efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.