Breast Cancer ScreeningWISDOMNCT02620852
Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures of Risk (Wisdom Study)
A study testing Complete a health questionnaire, Provide a saliva sample for genetic testing and Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment in people with Breast Cancer Screening and Breast Carcinoma in Situ, run by University of California, San Francisco at 11 sites in United States.
Trial summary
Most physicians still use a one-size-fits-all approach to breast screening in which all women, regardless of their personal history, family history or genetics (except BReast CAncer gene (BRCA) carriers) are recommended to have annual mammograms starting at age 40. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 30 to 74 years, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Cancer Screening, Breast Carcinoma in Situ, Breast Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Complete a health questionnaire, Provide a saliva sample for genetic testing and Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100,000 participants
- Where
- 11 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 31 Aug 2016to 30 Sep 2029
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 30 to 74 years
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Female*
- Age 30 years to 74 years old**
- Reside in the United States***
- NOTE: As of 2019, we are now enrolling all persons who identify as female, and will capture both their sex at birth and gender identity in the baseline survey.
- NOTE: Eligibility from 2016 - October 2023 included ages 40-74 (WISDOM 1.0) and expanded to age 30 in October 2023 (WISDOM 2.0).
- NOTE: As of 2019, recruitment is available nationwide. Original eligibility was limited to California, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Minnesota, Alabama, Louisiana, Illinois OR have coverage from a participating health plan.
Who cannot join
- Prior Breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosis
- Prior prophylactic bilateral mastectomy
- Inability to provide consent
- Non-English or Spanish proficiency (Spanish participation available: June 2019)
Trial locations and contacts
11 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Jennifer Atamer contact
11 sites in 1 country
United States11 sites, 9 recruiting
- Recruiting
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama, 35294
Stacey Ingram, MEd, 205-934-5287, saadewakun@uabmc.edu
Rachael Lancaster, MD
- Recruiting
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois, 60637
Brenda Gonzales, 773-702-1089, BGonzales@bsd.uchicago.edu
Ilona Siljander, isiljander1@bsd.uchicago.edu
- Recruiting
University of California Irvine
Irvine, California, 92618
Hannah Park, PhD, 949-824-2651, hlpark@uci.edu
Hoda Anton-Culver, PhD
- Recruiting
University of California Los Angeles
Los Angeles, California, 90095
Antonia Petruse, BA, 310-794-0367, APetruse@mednet.ucla.edu
Arash Naeim, MD, PhD
- Recruiting
TopLine MD Alliance
Miami, Florida, 33173
Michael Plaza, MD, mplaza@femwell.com
Isabella Cabaleiro, icabaleiro@femwell.com
- Active, not recruiting
Louisiana State University
New Orleans, Louisiana, 70112
- Recruiting
Weill Cornell Medicine
New York, New York, 10021
Yiwey Shieh, MD
- Recruiting
University of California Davis
Sacramento, California, 95817
Skye Stewart, MS, 916-734-5772, sdstewart@UCDavis.edu
Alexander Borowsky, MD
- Recruiting
University of California San Diego
San Diego, California, 92093
Sheri Hartman, PhD, info@wisdomstudy.org
Barbara Parker, MD
- Recruiting
University of California San Francisco
San Francisco, California, 94115
Laura van 't Veer, PhD, wisdom@ucsf.edu
Laura van 't Veer, PhD
- Active, not recruiting
Edith Sanford Breast Center
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, 57117
About this study
Official title: Enabling a Paradigm Shift: A Preference-Tolerant RCT of Personalized vs. Annual Screening for Breast Cancer (Wisdom Study)
Most physicians still use a one-size-fits-all approach to breast screening in which all women, regardless of their personal history, family history or genetics (except BReast CAncer gene (BRCA) carriers) are recommended to have annual mammograms starting at age 40. Mammograms benefit women by detecting cancers early when they are easier to treat, but they are not perfect. Recent news stories have discussed some of the potential harms: large numbers of positive results that cause stressful recalls for additional mammograms and biopsies. With the current screening approach, half of the women who undergo annual screening for ten years will have at least one false positive biopsy. Potentially more important are cancer diagnoses for growths that might never come to clinical attention if left alone (called "overdiagnosis"). This can lead to unnecessary treatment. Even more concerning is evidence that up to 20% of breast cancers detected today may fall into the category of "overdiagnosis."
The WISDOM 1.0 study compares annual screening with a risk-based breast cancer screening schedule, based upon each woman's personal risk of breast cancer. The investigators have designed the study to be inclusive of all, so that even women who might be nervous about being randomly assigned to receive a particular type of care (a procedure that is typical in clinical studies) will still be able to participate by choosing the type of care they receive.
Read more
For participants in the risk-based screening arm, each woman will receive a personal risk assessment that includes her family and medical history, breast density measurement and tests for genes (mutations and variations) linked to the development of breast cancer. Women who have the highest personal risk of developing breast cancer will receive more frequent screening, while women with a lower personal risk would receive less frequent screening. No woman will be screened less than is recommended by the USPSTF breast cancer screening guidelines.
If this study is successful, women will gain a realistic understanding of their personal risk of breast cancer as well as strategies to reduce their risk, and fewer women will suffer from the anxiety of false positive mammograms and unnecessary biopsies. The investigators believe this study has the potential to transform breast cancer screening in America.
Starting in Spring 2023, WISDOM's design shifted to remove the randomized option, but will continue with the preference/self-selection option for participation (WISDOM 2.0). Participants will therefore continue to choose their study arm (Personalized or Annual) rather than have the option to be randomized. This study design change was made after review of the WISDOM 1.0 data by an independent monitoring committee, which indicates that personalized screening does not cause harm. WISDOM 2.0 has also lowered the eligibility to ages 30-74. Women ages 30-39 will only be offered to join the Personalized Arm.
Read the detailed description
For almost 30 years, annual mammograms for women over 40 have been a cornerstone of the US strategy to reduce mortality from breast cancer. A number of advances in the understanding of breast cancer biology, and screening in general, have led to calls to revise and improve national screening strategies (Esserman et al., 2014). In 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) introduced changes to screening guidelines, recommending that annual mammograms for all women 40-75 be replaced by biennial screening for women ages 50-75, and that screening in the 40's should be individualized by taking patient context into account, including the patient's values regarding specific benefits and harms. Despite being based on a thorough review of the scientific literature, these recommendations continue to spark debate and scientific opinion on the effectiveness of annual screening is greatly divided. On one hand the radiology and obstetrics/gynecology community argues that annual mammograms starting at 40 reduce the rate of interval cancers. On the other hand, primary care physicians and other specialists believe that annual screening results in more false-positives and unnecessary treatment and that a more targeted approach could result in fewer false-positives and less over-diagnosis without increasing the number of interval cancers. In fact it has been estimated that half of women will receive a false-positive recall over 10 years of annual screening and that as many as 20% of all breast cancers might be overdiagnosed. Since 2009 this debate has intensified, paralyzing the system and thwarting any efforts to change or improve screening. The end result is that women are frustrated and confused, and some have stopped screening altogether.
Despite a vastly improved understanding of breast cancer risk, the only criteria used to establish a woman's screening recommendations is her age (and BRCA status if known), but there are risk models available that incorporate personal and family history of breast disease, endocrine exposures and breast density to assess breast cancer risk (Constantino, et al., 1999; Parmigiani, et al., 1998; Tyrer, et al., 2004; Claus, et al., 2001; Ozanne, et al., 2003). Most recently certain genetic mutations and common genetic variants (single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNPs) have been confirmed predictors as well (Darabi, et al., 2012). Therefore, advances in this understanding of breast cancer biology, risk assessment, and imaging have enabled the creation of better tools and sufficient knowledge to replace the one-size-fits-all approach to screening and to implement a new, personalized model; one that provides recommendations on when to start, when to stop, and how often to screen that depend upon well characterized measures of risk.
The investigators propose to test a transformational evidence-based approach to breast screening that educates women about their actual risk, and tailors screening recommendations to them as individuals. Within the Athena Breast Health Network, the study will compare comprehensive, patient-centered risk-based screening to annual screening for women starting at age 40. The comprehensive risk assessment is based on a widely accepted risk model, the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium model, that includes endocrine exposures, family history and breast density, with additional genomic risk factors that include rare and uncommon major breast cancer susceptibility alleles as well as more common and recently validated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that can, cumulatively, contribute significantly to a woman's individual risk. The study's personalized approach will recommend an age to start and stop screening as well as a frequency based upon individual risk. Women of highest risk will receive greater surveillance than those of lowest risk where the lower bound is the USPSTF recommended guidelines. In this manner, the study will focus the most effort on those most likely to develop the disease.
In close collaboration with patient advocates, the WISDOM 1.0 study has been designed as a 5-year, preference-tolerant, 65,000 patient, randomized controlled trial of risk-based versus annual screening. Individuals uncomfortable with the potential to be assigned to a particular arm in the randomized cohort can participate in the self-assigned observational cohort, an example of the pragmatic approach taken. Total accrual is anticipated to be 100,000 women across both cohorts. A broad group of stakeholders have participated in crafting this approach, including advocates, payers, the entire range of medical specialists and primary care providers and researchers involved with breast cancer screening across the entire Athena Network, technology partners, the Office of the President at the University of California, and policy-making organizations. WISDOM 1.0 trial was originally designed to randomize 65,000 women and be completed after five years to provide a median of ~3 years of exposure time in each randomized arm. However, due to slow initial accrual, trial duration was extended to up to ten years enabling a sample size reduction with maintained statistical power. The accrual goals were updated and approved by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute.
The study hypothesizes that risk-based screening will be an improvement over annual screening because it will be as safe, less morbid, enable more cancer prevention, less stressful and more readily accepted by women as a result of an improved understanding of their personal risk.
The Athena Breast Health Network was established across the 5 University of California medical centers to develop a new, harmonized approach to breast cancer prevention, screening and treatment. Athena is among the few centers in North America to use technology to integrate risk assessment into breast screening. The investigators have developed a cadre of "breast health specialists" who provide women with counseling and support around risk and prevention. There are currently 100,000 registered Athena participants, with 30,000 new patients per year and growing with the addition of Sanford Health, one of the largest rural health networks in the country. The primary research mission of Athena is to address issues requiring a population-based approach and translate solutions to clinical practice. Athena is uniquely positioned to address the screening controversy and provide women with renewed confidence in decisions about their breast health. Risk-based screening for breast cancer is exactly the advanced, evidence-based approach to medicine described in the NIH and FDA's "Path to Personalized Medicine". If these hypotheses prove to be correct, this study will be able to establish a clear justification for its use, and provide a framework for widespread implementation that will benefit women across the country.
Starting in Spring 2023, WISDOM's design shifted to remove the randomized option, but will continue with the preference/self-selection option for participation (WISDOM 2.0). Participants will therefore continue to choose their study arm (Personalized or Annual) rather than have the option to be randomized. This study design change was made after review of the WISDOM 1.0 data by an independent monitoring committee, which indicates that personalized screening does not cause harm. WISDOM 2.0 has also lowered the eligibility to ages 30-74. Women ages 30-39 will only be offered to join the Personalized Arm.
- Being tested
- Complete a health questionnaire, Provide a saliva sample for genetic testing, Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment, Screening advice based on a basic risk assessment
- Keywords
- Breast screening, mammography, prevention, risk assessment, DCIS, Breast cancer, Wisdom
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Carcinoma In Situ, Breast Neoplasms, Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Complete a health questionnaireOther
Complete a health history questionnaire.
Provide a saliva sample for genetic testingDevice
Provide a saliva sample for testing of 9 genes and a panel of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that influence breast cancer risk
Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessmentOther
Receive a screening schedule recommendation
Screening advice based on a basic risk assessmentOther
Receive a screening schedule recommendation
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Annual Arm | Active comparator | Women in this arm will receive Athena standard of care mammography screening, including annual mammograms. They will complete a health questionnaire and receive screening advice based on a basic risk assessment. Receives: Other: Complete a health questionnaire; Other: Screening advice based on a basic risk assessment |
| Risk-Based Arm | Experimental | Women in this arm will receive risk-based screening, where risk is calculated based on a model including personal history, family history, and genetic testing. All women in the risk-based arm complete a health questionnaire, provide a saliva sample for genetic testing, and receive screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment. Women in this arm will be tested for a panel of 9 genes related to breast cancer risk as well as a panel of SNPs, which can further modify risk. Women will be assigned a screening start date, screening stop date, and screening frequency. Receives: Other: Complete a health questionnaire; Device: Provide a saliva sample for genetic testing; Other: Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Late-stage cancer
Proportion of cancers diagnosed at Stage IIB or higher
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Biopsy rate
Rate of biopsies performed
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Secondary outcomes (12)
Late-stage cancer rate and interval cancer rate
Rate of Stage IIB or higher cancers and rate of interval (detected within 12-24 months of a normal screen) cancers
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Rate of stage IIA cancers
To assess the difference between the arms in the rate of stage IIA cancers (prognostic and anatomic), specifically to test for non-inferiority of personalized screening compared with annual screening with respect to detection rates of prognostic and anatomic stage IIA cancers.
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Rate of systemic therapy
Rate of systemic therapy as measure of morbidity
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Breast imaging rate
Breast imaging (Mammogram or MRI) rate as measure of morbidity
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Breast biopsy rate
Breast biopsy rate as measure of morbidity
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
DCIS rate
Rate of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) as a measure of morbidity, stratified by biologic type
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Chemoprevention uptake rate
Rate of uptake of endocrine prevention interventions
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Choice of risk-based versus annual screening in self-assigned cohort
Proportion of participants who choose risk-based versus annual screening in the self-assigned cohort as a measure of acceptability
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Adherence to assigned screening schedule
Proportion of participants who adhere to their assigned screening schedules as a measure of acceptability
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Breast-cancer anxiety
Breast cancer anxiety (as measured with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) anxiety scale) as a measure of acceptability
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Decisional regret
Decisional regret (as measured with the Decision Regret Scale, a 5-item Likert scale) as a measure of acceptability
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Ultra-low risk cancer rate
Rates of ultra-low risk cancer
Measured: 5 years (minimum)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Dec 2015 (estimated)
- Study start31 Aug 2016
- Primary completion30 Sep 2029 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Sep 2029 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (13)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Breast Cancer ScreeningStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, San FranciscoThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100,000 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San Francisco
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Color Genomics, Inc., Salesforce, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Safeway Foundation, United States Department of Defense, Breast Cancer Research Foundation
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Laura Esserman, MD, MBA, Principal investigator, University of California, San Francisco
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02620852
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PCS-1402-10749
- Other IDs
- NCI-2018-00562, R01CA237533-01A1, 16752
- Acronym
- WISDOM
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 1 Dec 2015
- Last updated
- 21 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Esserman LJ, Thompson IM, Reid B, Nelson P, Ransohoff DF, Welch HG, Hwang S, Berry DA, Kinzler KW, Black WC, Bissell M, Parnes H, Srivastava S. Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change. Lancet Oncol. 2014 May;15(6):e234-42. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70598-9.
PubMed 24807866Costantino JP, Gail MH, Pee D, Anderson S, Redmond CK, Benichou J, Wieand HS. Validation studies for models projecting the risk of invasive and total breast cancer incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Sep 15;91(18):1541-8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/91.18.1541.
PubMed 10491430Parmigiani G, Berry D, Aguilar O. Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Jan;62(1):145-58. doi: 10.1086/301670.
PubMed 9443863Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004 Apr 15;23(7):1111-30. doi: 10.1002/sim.1668.
PubMed 15057881Claus EB. Risk models used to counsel women for breast and ovarian cancer: a guide for clinicians. Fam Cancer. 2001;1(3-4):197-206. doi: 10.1023/a:1021135807900.
PubMed 14574179Ozanne EM, Annis C, Adduci K, Showstack J, Esserman L. Pilot trial of a computerized decision aid for breast cancer prevention. Breast J. 2007 Mar-Apr;13(2):147-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2007.00395.x.
PubMed 17319855Darabi H, Czene K, Zhao W, Liu J, Hall P, Humphreys K. Breast cancer risk prediction and individualised screening based on common genetic variation and breast density measurement. Breast Cancer Res. 2012 Feb 7;14(1):R25. doi: 10.1186/bcr3110.
PubMed 22314178Shieh Y, Heise RS, Madlensky L, Sabacan LP, Soto IA, Fiscalini AS, Ross K, Goodman D, Blanco A, Brain S, Heditsian DM, Moya J, Fergus KB, Olopade OI, Scheuner MT, Eklund M, Ziv E, Tice JA, van 't Veer L, Esserman LJ; Athena Breast Health Network and WISDOM Study Investigators and Advocate Partners. Impact of Population-Based Pathogenic Variant Testing on Risk-Based Breast Screening Recommendations: A Secondary Analysis of the WISDOM Study. JAMA Oncol. 2026 May 31:e262091. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2026.2091. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42218736Fiscalini A, Blum K, Fergus K, Hiatt RA, Naeim A, Kaster A, Scheuner MT, van 't Veer LJ, LaCroix AZ, Borowsky AD, Olopade OI, Park HL, Esserman J, Lancaster R, Heditsian D, Brain S, Lee V, Goodman DL, Ross KS, Wenger N, Parker BA, Madlensky L, Tice JA, Shieh Y, Ziv E, Arasu VA, Anton-Culver H, Kaplan CP, Rhoads KF, Badal K, Hogarth M, Petruse A, Soto IA, Leggat-Barr K, Goodman S, Atamer J, Ryu R, Adduci K, Matthews JB, Eklund M; Athena/WISDOM Network Collaborators and Advocate Partners; Sabacan LP, Esserman L. WISDOM randomized trial comparing risk-based versus annual breast cancer screening: study cohort characteristics and design. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2026 May 24;12(1):108. doi: 10.1038/s41523-026-00952-x.
PubMed 42177197Fergus KB, Ross KS, Scheuner MT, Blanco AM, Tice JA, Ziv E, Shieh Y, van 't Veer L, Olopade OI, Goodman DL, Tong BS, Harvey H, DeRosa D, Risty L, Silver E, Kaster A, Fiscalini AS, Blum K, Heise R, Sabacan L, Heditsian D, Brain S, Petruse A, Eklund M, Hiatt RA, Borowsky AD, Naeim A, Park HL, LaCroix AZ, Parker BA, Lancaster R, Esserman J, Wenger N, Arasu V, Anton-Culver H, Esserman LJ, Madlensky L. Germline Pathogenic Variants Among Women Without a History of Breast Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the WISDOM Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2026 Mar 1;186(3):344-352. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.7323.
PubMed 41385723Esserman LJ, Fiscalini AS, Naeim A, Van't Veer LJ, Kaster A, Scheuner MT, LaCroix AZ, Borowsky AD, Anton-Culver H, Olopade OI, Esserman J, Lancaster R, Madlensky L, Blanco AM, Ross KS, Goodman DL, Tong BS, Hogarth M, Heditsian D, Brain S, Lee V, Blum K, Kim MO, Sabacan LP, Fergus KB, Yau C, Park HL, Parker BA, Kaplan C, Rhoads KF, Eder S, Adduci K, Matthews JB, Wenger NS, Shieh Y, Hiatt RA, Ziv E, Tice JA, Eklund M. Risk-Based vs Annual Breast Cancer Screening: The WISDOM Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2026 Mar 3;335(9):763-774. doi: 10.1001/jama.2025.24784.
PubMed 41385349Fergus KB, Heise RS, Madlensky L, Fiscalini A, Sabacan L, Theiner S, Kapoor S, Soto IA, Blanco A, Ross K, Goodman-Gruen D, Scheuner M, Hu D, Heditsian D, Brain S, Arasu VA, Kaster A, Chapa L, Olopade OI, Eklund M, Tice JA, Ziv E, van 't Veer L, Esserman LJ, Shieh Y; Athena/WISDOM Network Collaborators and Advocate Partners. Integrating breast cancer polygenic risk scores at scale in the WISDOM Study: a national randomized personalized screening trial. Genome Med. 2025 Aug 28;17(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s13073-025-01524-7.
PubMed 40877879Leggat-Barr K, Ryu R, Hogarth M, Stover-Fiscalini A, Veer LV', Park HL, Lewis T, Thompson C, Borowsky A, Hiatt RA, LaCroix A, Parker B, Madlensky L, Naeim A, Esserman L. Early Ascertainment of Breast Cancer Diagnoses Comparing Self-Reported Questionnaires and Electronic Health Record Data Warehouse: The WISDOM Study. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2023 Aug;7:e2300019. doi: 10.1200/CCI.23.00019.
PubMed 37607323
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Enabling a Paradigm Shift: A Preference-Tolerant RCT of Personalized vs. Annual Screening for Breast Cancer (Wisdom Study)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02620852
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- WISDOM / PCS-1402-10749
- Keywords
- Breast screening, mammography, prevention, risk assessment, DCIS, Breast cancer, Wisdom
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 100,000 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San FranciscoUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Color Genomics, Inc., Salesforce, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Safeway Foundation, United States Department of Defense, Breast Cancer Research Foundation
- Study start
- 31 Aug 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2029 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2029 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 Dec 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Most physicians still use a one-size-fits-all approach to breast screening in which all women, regardless of their personal history, family history or genetics (except BReast CAncer gene (BRCA) carriers) are recommended to have annual mammograms starting at age 40. Mammograms benefit women by detecting cancers early when they are easier to treat, but they are not perfect. Recent news stories have discussed some of the potential harms: large numbers of positive results that cause stressful recalls for additional mammograms and biopsies. With the current screening approach, half of the women who undergo annual screening for ten years will have at least one false positive biopsy. Potentially more important are cancer diagnoses for growths that might never come to clinical attention if left alone (called "overdiagnosis"). This can lead to unnecessary treatment. Even more concerning is evidence that up to 20% of breast cancers detected today may fall into the category of "overdiagnosis."
The WISDOM 1.0 study compares annual screening with a risk-based breast cancer screening schedule, based upon each woman's personal risk of breast cancer. The investigators have designed the study to be inclusive of all, so that even women who might be nervous about being randomly assigned to receive a particular type of care (a procedure that is typical in clinical studies) will still be able to participate by choosing the type of care they receive.
For participants in the risk-based screening arm, each woman will receive a personal risk assessment that includes her family and medical history, breast density measurement and tests for genes (mutations and variations) linked to the development of breast cancer. Women who have the highest personal risk of developing breast cancer will receive more frequent screening, while women with a lower personal risk would receive less frequent screening. No woman will be screened less than is recommended by the USPSTF breast cancer screening guidelines.
If this study is successful, women will gain a realistic understanding of their personal risk of breast cancer as well as strategies to reduce their risk, and fewer women will suffer from the anxiety of false positive mammograms and unnecessary biopsies. The investigators believe this study has the potential to transform breast cancer screening in America.
Starting in Spring 2023, WISDOM's design shifted to remove the randomized option, but will continue with the preference/self-selection option for participation (WISDOM 2.0). Participants will therefore continue to choose their study arm (Personalized or Annual) rather than have the option to be randomized. This study design change was made after review of the WISDOM 1.0 data by an independent monitoring committee, which indicates that personalized screening does not cause harm. WISDOM 2.0 has also lowered the eligibility to ages 30-74. Women ages 30-39 will only be offered to join the Personalized Arm.
Detailed description
For almost 30 years, annual mammograms for women over 40 have been a cornerstone of the US strategy to reduce mortality from breast cancer. A number of advances in the understanding of breast cancer biology, and screening in general, have led to calls to revise and improve national screening strategies (Esserman et al., 2014). In 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) introduced changes to screening guidelines, recommending that annual mammograms for all women 40-75 be replaced by biennial screening for women ages 50-75, and that screening in the 40's should be individualized by taking patient context into account, including the patient's values regarding specific benefits and harms. Despite being based on a thorough review of the scientific literature, these recommendations continue to spark debate and scientific opinion on the effectiveness of annual screening is greatly divided. On one hand the radiology and obstetrics/gynecology community argues that annual mammograms starting at 40 reduce the rate of interval cancers. On the other hand, primary care physicians and other specialists believe that annual screening results in more false-positives and unnecessary treatment and that a more targeted approach could result in fewer false-positives and less over-diagnosis without increasing the number of interval cancers. In fact it has been estimated that half of women will receive a false-positive recall over 10 years of annual screening and that as many as 20% of all breast cancers might be overdiagnosed. Since 2009 this debate has intensified, paralyzing the system and thwarting any efforts to change or improve screening. The end result is that women are frustrated and confused, and some have stopped screening altogether.
Despite a vastly improved understanding of breast cancer risk, the only criteria used to establish a woman's screening recommendations is her age (and BRCA status if known), but there are risk models available that incorporate personal and family history of breast disease, endocrine exposures and breast density to assess breast cancer risk (Constantino, et al., 1999; Parmigiani, et al., 1998; Tyrer, et al., 2004; Claus, et al., 2001; Ozanne, et al., 2003). Most recently certain genetic mutations and common genetic variants (single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNPs) have been confirmed predictors as well (Darabi, et al., 2012). Therefore, advances in this understanding of breast cancer biology, risk assessment, and imaging have enabled the creation of better tools and sufficient knowledge to replace the one-size-fits-all approach to screening and to implement a new, personalized model; one that provides recommendations on when to start, when to stop, and how often to screen that depend upon well characterized measures of risk.
The investigators propose to test a transformational evidence-based approach to breast screening that educates women about their actual risk, and tailors screening recommendations to them as individuals. Within the Athena Breast Health Network, the study will compare comprehensive, patient-centered risk-based screening to annual screening for women starting at age 40. The comprehensive risk assessment is based on a widely accepted risk model, the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium model, that includes endocrine exposures, family history and breast density, with additional genomic risk factors that include rare and uncommon major breast cancer susceptibility alleles as well as more common and recently validated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that can, cumulatively, contribute significantly to a woman's individual risk. The study's personalized approach will recommend an age to start and stop screening as well as a frequency based upon individual risk. Women of highest risk will receive greater surveillance than those of lowest risk where the lower bound is the USPSTF recommended guidelines. In this manner, the study will focus the most effort on those most likely to develop the disease.
In close collaboration with patient advocates, the WISDOM 1.0 study has been designed as a 5-year, preference-tolerant, 65,000 patient, randomized controlled trial of risk-based versus annual screening. Individuals uncomfortable with the potential to be assigned to a particular arm in the randomized cohort can participate in the self-assigned observational cohort, an example of the pragmatic approach taken. Total accrual is anticipated to be 100,000 women across both cohorts. A broad group of stakeholders have participated in crafting this approach, including advocates, payers, the entire range of medical specialists and primary care providers and researchers involved with breast cancer screening across the entire Athena Network, technology partners, the Office of the President at the University of California, and policy-making organizations. WISDOM 1.0 trial was originally designed to randomize 65,000 women and be completed after five years to provide a median of ~3 years of exposure time in each randomized arm. However, due to slow initial accrual, trial duration was extended to up to ten years enabling a sample size reduction with maintained statistical power. The accrual goals were updated and approved by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute.
The study hypothesizes that risk-based screening will be an improvement over annual screening because it will be as safe, less morbid, enable more cancer prevention, less stressful and more readily accepted by women as a result of an improved understanding of their personal risk.
The Athena Breast Health Network was established across the 5 University of California medical centers to develop a new, harmonized approach to breast cancer prevention, screening and treatment. Athena is among the few centers in North America to use technology to integrate risk assessment into breast screening. The investigators have developed a cadre of "breast health specialists" who provide women with counseling and support around risk and prevention. There are currently 100,000 registered Athena participants, with 30,000 new patients per year and growing with the addition of Sanford Health, one of the largest rural health networks in the country. The primary research mission of Athena is to address issues requiring a population-based approach and translate solutions to clinical practice. Athena is uniquely positioned to address the screening controversy and provide women with renewed confidence in decisions about their breast health. Risk-based screening for breast cancer is exactly the advanced, evidence-based approach to medicine described in the NIH and FDA's "Path to Personalized Medicine". If these hypotheses prove to be correct, this study will be able to establish a clear justification for its use, and provide a framework for widespread implementation that will benefit women across the country.
Starting in Spring 2023, WISDOM's design shifted to remove the randomized option, but will continue with the preference/self-selection option for participation (WISDOM 2.0). Participants will therefore continue to choose their study arm (Personalized or Annual) rather than have the option to be randomized. This study design change was made after review of the WISDOM 1.0 data by an independent monitoring committee, which indicates that personalized screening does not cause harm. WISDOM 2.0 has also lowered the eligibility to ages 30-74. Women ages 30-39 will only be offered to join the Personalized Arm.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Annual Arm | Active comparator | Other: Complete a health questionnaire, Other: Screening advice based on a basic risk assessmentWomen in this arm will receive Athena standard of care mammography screening, including annual mammograms. They will complete a health questionnaire and receive screening advice based on a basic risk assessment. |
| Risk-Based Arm | Experimental | Other: Complete a health questionnaire, Device: Provide a saliva sample for genetic testing, Other: Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessmentWomen in this arm will receive risk-based screening, where risk is calculated based on a model including personal history, family history, and genetic testing. All women in the risk-based arm complete a health questionnaire, provide a saliva sample for genetic testing, and receive screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment. Women in this arm will be tested for a panel of 9 genes related to breast cancer risk as well as a panel of SNPs, which can further modify risk. Women will be assigned a screening start date, screening stop date, and screening frequency. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 30 to 74 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Female*
- Age 30 years to 74 years old**
- Reside in the United States***
- NOTE: As of 2019, we are now enrolling all persons who identify as female, and will capture both their sex at birth and gender identity in the baseline survey.
- NOTE: Eligibility from 2016 - October 2023 included ages 40-74 (WISDOM 1.0) and expanded to age 30 in October 2023 (WISDOM 2.0).
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Prior Breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosis
- Prior prophylactic bilateral mastectomy
- Inability to provide consent
- Non-English or Spanish proficiency (Spanish participation available: June 2019)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Complete a health questionnaireComplete a health history questionnaire. | Other | Annual Arm, Risk-Based Arm |
| Provide a saliva sample for genetic testingProvide a saliva sample for testing of 9 genes and a panel of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that influence breast cancer risk | Device | Risk-Based Arm |
| Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessmentReceive a screening schedule recommendation | Other | Risk-Based Arm |
| Screening advice based on a basic risk assessmentReceive a screening schedule recommendation | Other | Annual Arm |
Primary outcome
Late-stage cancer
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Proportion of cancers diagnosed at Stage IIB or higher
Biopsy rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Rate of biopsies performed
12 secondary outcomes
Late-stage cancer rate and interval cancer rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Rate of stage IIA cancers
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Rate of systemic therapy
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Breast imaging rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Breast biopsy rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
DCIS rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Chemoprevention uptake rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Choice of risk-based versus annual screening in self-assigned cohort
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Adherence to assigned screening schedule
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Breast-cancer anxiety
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Decisional regret
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Ultra-low risk cancer rate
Time frame: 5 years (minimum)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Sep 2026.
- Background: PubMed 24807866Esserman LJ, Thompson IM, Reid B, Nelson P, Ransohoff DF, Welch HG, Hwang S, Berry DA, Kinzler KW, Black WC, Bissell M, Parnes H, Srivastava S. Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: a prescription for change. Lancet Oncol. 2014 May;15(6):e234-42. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70598-9.
- Background: PubMed 10491430Costantino JP, Gail MH, Pee D, Anderson S, Redmond CK, Benichou J, Wieand HS. Validation studies for models projecting the risk of invasive and total breast cancer incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Sep 15;91(18):1541-8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/91.18.1541.
- Background: PubMed 9443863Parmigiani G, Berry D, Aguilar O. Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Jan;62(1):145-58. doi: 10.1086/301670.
- Background: PubMed 15057881Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004 Apr 15;23(7):1111-30. doi: 10.1002/sim.1668.
- Background: PubMed 14574179Claus EB. Risk models used to counsel women for breast and ovarian cancer: a guide for clinicians. Fam Cancer. 2001;1(3-4):197-206. doi: 10.1023/a:1021135807900.
- Background: PubMed 17319855Ozanne EM, Annis C, Adduci K, Showstack J, Esserman L. Pilot trial of a computerized decision aid for breast cancer prevention. Breast J. 2007 Mar-Apr;13(2):147-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2007.00395.x.
- Background: PubMed 22314178Darabi H, Czene K, Zhao W, Liu J, Hall P, Humphreys K. Breast cancer risk prediction and individualised screening based on common genetic variation and breast density measurement. Breast Cancer Res. 2012 Feb 7;14(1):R25. doi: 10.1186/bcr3110.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42218736Shieh Y, Heise RS, Madlensky L, Sabacan LP, Soto IA, Fiscalini AS, Ross K, Goodman D, Blanco A, Brain S, Heditsian DM, Moya J, Fergus KB, Olopade OI, Scheuner MT, Eklund M, Ziv E, Tice JA, van 't Veer L, Esserman LJ; Athena Breast Health Network and WISDOM Study Investigators and Advocate Partners. Impact of Population-Based Pathogenic Variant Testing on Risk-Based Breast Screening Recommendations: A Secondary Analysis of the WISDOM Study. JAMA Oncol. 2026 May 31:e262091. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2026.2091. Online ahead of print.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42177197Fiscalini A, Blum K, Fergus K, Hiatt RA, Naeim A, Kaster A, Scheuner MT, van 't Veer LJ, LaCroix AZ, Borowsky AD, Olopade OI, Park HL, Esserman J, Lancaster R, Heditsian D, Brain S, Lee V, Goodman DL, Ross KS, Wenger N, Parker BA, Madlensky L, Tice JA, Shieh Y, Ziv E, Arasu VA, Anton-Culver H, Kaplan CP, Rhoads KF, Badal K, Hogarth M, Petruse A, Soto IA, Leggat-Barr K, Goodman S, Atamer J, Ryu R, Adduci K, Matthews JB, Eklund M; Athena/WISDOM Network Collaborators and Advocate Partners; Sabacan LP, Esserman L. WISDOM randomized trial comparing risk-based versus annual breast cancer screening: study cohort characteristics and design. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2026 May 24;12(1):108. doi: 10.1038/s41523-026-00952-x.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41385723Fergus KB, Ross KS, Scheuner MT, Blanco AM, Tice JA, Ziv E, Shieh Y, van 't Veer L, Olopade OI, Goodman DL, Tong BS, Harvey H, DeRosa D, Risty L, Silver E, Kaster A, Fiscalini AS, Blum K, Heise R, Sabacan L, Heditsian D, Brain S, Petruse A, Eklund M, Hiatt RA, Borowsky AD, Naeim A, Park HL, LaCroix AZ, Parker BA, Lancaster R, Esserman J, Wenger N, Arasu V, Anton-Culver H, Esserman LJ, Madlensky L. Germline Pathogenic Variants Among Women Without a History of Breast Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the WISDOM Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2026 Mar 1;186(3):344-352. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.7323.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41385349Esserman LJ, Fiscalini AS, Naeim A, Van't Veer LJ, Kaster A, Scheuner MT, LaCroix AZ, Borowsky AD, Anton-Culver H, Olopade OI, Esserman J, Lancaster R, Madlensky L, Blanco AM, Ross KS, Goodman DL, Tong BS, Hogarth M, Heditsian D, Brain S, Lee V, Blum K, Kim MO, Sabacan LP, Fergus KB, Yau C, Park HL, Parker BA, Kaplan C, Rhoads KF, Eder S, Adduci K, Matthews JB, Wenger NS, Shieh Y, Hiatt RA, Ziv E, Tice JA, Eklund M. Risk-Based vs Annual Breast Cancer Screening: The WISDOM Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2026 Mar 3;335(9):763-774. doi: 10.1001/jama.2025.24784.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40877879Fergus KB, Heise RS, Madlensky L, Fiscalini A, Sabacan L, Theiner S, Kapoor S, Soto IA, Blanco A, Ross K, Goodman-Gruen D, Scheuner M, Hu D, Heditsian D, Brain S, Arasu VA, Kaster A, Chapa L, Olopade OI, Eklund M, Tice JA, Ziv E, van 't Veer L, Esserman LJ, Shieh Y; Athena/WISDOM Network Collaborators and Advocate Partners. Integrating breast cancer polygenic risk scores at scale in the WISDOM Study: a national randomized personalized screening trial. Genome Med. 2025 Aug 28;17(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s13073-025-01524-7.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Breast Cancer Screening
Recruiting
The Vanguard Study: Testing a New Way to Screen for Cancer
Bladder Carcinoma, Breast Carcinoma
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Harvesting Cells for Experimental Cancer Treatments
Melanoma, Gastrointestinal Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Collecting Blood Samples From Patients With and Without Cancer to Evaluate Tests for Early Cancer Detection
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, Acute Myeloid Leukemia
RecruitingObservational study
cfDNA Assay Prospective Observational Validation for Early Cancer Detection and Minimal Residual Disease
Brain Cancer, Breast Cancer
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Early Detection of Breast Cancer Among Syrian Women
Breast Cancer Detection
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Jennifer Atamer contact
Laura Esserman, MD, MBA principal investigator
University of California, San Francisco
11 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Complete a health questionnaire, Provide a saliva sample for genetic testing and Screening advice based on a comprehensive risk assessment in people with Breast Cancer Screening and Breast Carcinoma in Situ, run by University of California, San Francisco at 11 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 11 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Allison Fiscalini, MPH ((415) 476-0267, allison.stoverfiscalini@ucsf.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Late-stage cancer (time frame: 5 years (minimum)). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02620852, which also lists 13 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Sep 2026.