Actress reveals how cancer test that saved her life led to surprising family discovery
"My mother was diagnosed with breast cancer," the actress, 45, wrote in her caption.
"You may know that when I talk about my own battle with cancer, I bring up the Lifetime Risk Assessment test that saved my life. I never would've predicted it would save my mom's life as well."
While there are several risk assessment tools available to patients and physicians, the breast cancer risk assessment tool (BCRAT) is one of the most common, Fox News Digital previously reported.
The BCRAT is based on a statistical model known as the Gail Model.
It's named after Dr. Mitchell Gail, an NIH distinguished investigator at the National Cancer Institute, according to a National Cancer Institute (NCI) spokesperson.
The five-minute test helps predict a woman's risk of developing invasive breast cancer within the next five years, and up to 90 years of age, according to the NCI.
Just one year ago, Munn credited the test with prompting her to get a biopsy – even after mammograms and genetic testing came back negative.
The biopsy showed she had Luminal B cancer in both breasts.
Luminal B is an aggressive, fast-moving cancer.
The BCRAT calculates a woman's "absolute breast cancer risk."
On its website, the organization defines this as the "chance or probability of developing invasive breast cancer in a defined age interval."
The risk calculator considers factors including age, race, medical history and reproductive history.
It also looks at the family history of breast cancer among relatives like mothers, sisters and daughters.
Once the information is calculated, users are provided with a score.
Fox News Digital previously reported that a five-year risk score of 1.67% or more is considered high-risk. A healthcare provider may recommend certain medications to decrease the chances of developing cancer, according to Cleveland Clinic's website.
For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews.com/health
Dr. Nicole Saphier, M.D., board-certified breast imaging radiologist and associate professor at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, recommends individual risk assessments to her referring clinicians and patients.
"Olivia Munn's doctor may have saved her life by doing so," Saphier previously said in a statement to Fox News Digital when news of Munn's diagnosis first broke in 2024.
"While a standard mammogram is sufficient for nearly half of all women, many others will benefit from adding an ultrasound or MRI based on breast density and various other factors that may make someone [a] higher risk [candidate]."
Less than 5% of all women diagnosed with breast cancer will have cancer in the contralateral (opposite) breast, according to Saphier.
"Olivia Munn was one of those rare cases," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
4 hours ago
- Medscape
NIH Launches Agency-Wide Plan for Autoimmune Research
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has unveiled its first agency-wide strategic plan to address autoimmune diseases, supporting research on preclinical autoimmunity, early diagnosis, and innovative therapies. An estimated 23.5-50 million Americans are living with one or more autoimmune diseases. The initiative follows a congressional directive in 2023 that led to the creation of the NIH Office of Autoimmune Disease Research (OADR) within the Office of Research on Women's Health. The office convened a committee with representatives from multiple NIH institutes and centers to develop the plan, gathering input from researchers, clinicians, patient advocates, and people living with autoimmune diseases to define research priorities. The initiative 'is long overdue,' said Sonia Sharma, PhD, of the Center for Autoimmunity and Inflammation at La Jolla Institute for Immunology in La Jolla, California, in an interview with Medscape Medical News . 'Individually, some folks may consider these rare diseases; but as a collective, they are not rare and they are increasing.' While NIH investment in autoimmune disease research has increased from $822 million in 2014 to more than $1 billion in 2024, according to the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT), 'current funding levels are not proportional to the rising prevalence of autoimmune diseases, highlighting a significant gap,' said OADR Director Victoria Shanmugam, MBBS, in a video introducing the initiative. The launch of this plan comes at a precarious time for medical research funding. Over 2480 NIH grants, totaling $8.7 billion, have been canceled as of mid-June, according to Scientific American . The proposed Fiscal Year 2026 budget also includes a $18 billion cut to the NIH, a nearly 40% reduction from the current NIH budget. It's unclear if these cuts could affect this initiative, and the announcement included no funding details. The 5-year plan, announced on July 21, 2025, will run from 2026 through 2030 and has the following priorities: Accelerate scientific discovery in diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and cure of autoimmune diseases. Promote research to enhance health for people living with and at risk for autoimmune diseases. Support research to understand the full complexity of autoimmune diseases. Build and maintain capacity for autoimmune disease research. Build and strengthen partnerships and interdisciplinary collaboration across the autoimmune disease community. One research area emphasized in the plan is preclinical immunity, referred to as the prodrome, where autoantibodies and other markers of autoimmunity are present, yet symptoms have not yet developed. 'That's the black box of autoimmunity,' Sharma said. Studying the preclinical phases of disease could lead to earlier diagnosis, treatment, and potentially prevention, she added. The plan also included five 'crosscutting themes': develop infrastructure, support multimodal data-driven approaches, promote engagement of all patient populations, support community partnerships, and harness technologies to advance autoimmune disease research. Currently, the strategic plan lacks detailed timelines, but experts anticipate greater specificity as it advances. 'We would like to see more clarity around a timeline with specific deliverables, but that can't occur until they understand what and where the resources will be located,' said Molly Murray, president and CEO of the Autoimmune Association, in a statement to Medscape Medical News . She emphasized the need for 'specific, measurable milestones,' particularly for early disease detection and testing. 'We also want to see greater detail on how NIH will partner with existing centers of excellence in autoimmune research, and how patient voices will be consistently integrated into research design and priority-setting,' she continued. 'Ultimately, we're looking for this plan to become more than a document, but rather a catalyst for sustained coordination, investment, and accountability across the entire NIH enterprise.'
The Hill
14 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow NIH to cancel health grants
The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to allow it to continue moving forward with canceling National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants over their connections to diversity initiatives. The Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the court for an emergency stay that would stop Boston-based U.S. District Judge William Young's ruling last month, which halted the cancellation and forced the government to reinstate several of the grants. The case centered on a legal challenge by researchers, unions and a coalition of 16 Democratic-led states. They sued the administration after the NIH terminated grants supporting research on topics like health equity, racial disparities, vaccine hesitancy and maternal health in minority communities. The abrupt cancellations were part of the administration's quest to slash spending and end federal support for initiatives Trump officials considered to be promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). 'The district court's order directs the NIH to continue paying $783 million in federal grants that are undisputedly counter to the Administration's priorities,' DOJ wrote in the filing. 'Following the change in Administration, the NIH identified, explained, and pursued new funding priorities. That is democracy at work, not, as the district court thought, proof of inappropriate 'partisan[ship]'—let alone a permissible basis for setting agency action aside,' the filing stated. The Trump administration has repeatedly asked the Supreme Court to step in when its policies have been blocked by lower courts. Thursday's filing was the administration's 21st emergency application since taking office, and the White House has found success in nearly every single instance.
CBS News
15 hours ago
- CBS News
Trump administration asks the Supreme Court to let it move forward with NIH grant cuts
Washington — The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to give it the green light to cancel hundreds of grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health because they were tied to issues like gender identity and diversity, equity and inclusion. Solicitor General D. John Sauer asked the high court to halt a lower court decision that ordered the NIH to reinstate the grants and required the Trump administration to continue paying out roughly $783 million in awards. The administration had decided that the grants did not align with its policy objectives. The grants were canceled in response to executive orders signed by Mr. Trump soon after he returned to the White House that directed federal agencies to terminate awards and contracts that were related to diversity, equity and inclusion — or DEI — and gender identity research activities and programs. NIH began ending the grants that it said did not match the administration's policy priorities in February, and in April, 16 states, as well as research and advocacy groups, a union and researchers filed lawsuits challenging the cancellations. The plaintiffs asked the federal district court in Massachusetts to block NIH from terminating any grants and order the agency to restore any awards that had already been axed. The district court last month ruled in favor of the research entities after holding a bench trial in the cases, finding that NIH engaged in "no reasoned decision-making" in the rollout of the grant terminations. U.S. District Judge William Young, appointed by former President Ronald Reagan, tossed out the challenged directives. The Trump administration asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit to pause the district court's decision, which it declined to do. In the emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, Sauer said its request for relief gives it a chance to "stop errant district courts from continuing to disregard" its decisions. Sauer pointed to an April order from the Supreme Court that cleared the way for the Department of Education to cancel millions of dollars in grants that it said funded programs that involve DEI initiatives. The high court said in that order that the Trump administration was likely to succeed in showing that the federal district court that oversaw that case lacked jurisdiction to order the payment of money under a federal law governing the agency rulemaking process. The solicitor general said the judicial system does not rest on a "lower-court free-for-all where individual district judges feel free to elevate their own policy judgments over those of the Executive Branch, and their own legal judgments over those of this Court."
