BACKGROUND: Estimates of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (Hemoccult II) sensitivity differed widely between screening trials and led to divergent conclusions on the effects of FOBT screening. We used microsimulation modeling to estimate a preclinical colorectal cancer (CRC) duration and sensitivity for unrehydrated FOBT from the data of 3 randomized controlled trials of Minnesota, Nottingham, and Funen. In addition to 2 usual hypotheses on the sensitivity of FOBT, we tested a novel hypothesis where sensitivity is linked to the stage of clinical diagnosis in the situation without screening. METHODS: We used the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate sensitivity and duration, accounting for differences between the trials in demography, background incidence, and trial design. We tested 3 hypotheses for FOBT sensitivity: sensitivity is the same for all preclinical CRC stages, sensitivity increases with each stage, and sensitivity is higher for the stage in which the cancer would have been diagnosed in the absence of screening than for earlier stages. Goodness-of-fit was evaluated by comparing expected and observed rates of screen-detected and interval CRC. RESULTS: The hypothesis with a higher sensitivity in the stage of clinical diagnosis gave the best fit. Under this hypothesis, sensitivity of FOBT was 51% in the stage of clinical diagnosis and 19% in earlier stages. The average duration of preclinical CRC was estimated at 6.7 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis corroborated a long duration of preclinical CRC, with FOBT most sensitive in the stage of clinical diagnosis. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: Estimates of the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (Hemoccult II) sensitivity differed widely between screening trials and led to divergent conclusions on the effects of FOBT screening. We used microsimulation modeling to estimate a preclinical colorectal cancer (CRC) duration and sensitivity for unrehydrated FOBT from the data of 3 randomized controlled trials of Minnesota, Nottingham, and Funen. In addition to 2 usual hypotheses on the sensitivity of FOBT, we tested a novel hypothesis where sensitivity is linked to the stage of clinical diagnosis in the situation without screening. METHODS: We used the MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model to estimate sensitivity and duration, accounting for differences between the trials in demography, background incidence, and trial design. We tested 3 hypotheses for FOBT sensitivity: sensitivity is the same for all preclinical CRC stages, sensitivity increases with each stage, and sensitivity is higher for the stage in which the cancer would have been diagnosed in the absence of screening than for earlier stages. Goodness-of-fit was evaluated by comparing expected and observed rates of screen-detected and interval CRC. RESULTS: The hypothesis with a higher sensitivity in the stage of clinical diagnosis gave the best fit. Under this hypothesis, sensitivity of FOBT was 51% in the stage of clinical diagnosis and 19% in earlier stages. The average duration of preclinical CRC was estimated at 6.7 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis corroborated a long duration of preclinical CRC, with FOBT most sensitive in the stage of clinical diagnosis. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
Authors: Reinier G S Meester; Chyke A Doubeni; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; S Lucas Goede; Theodore R Levin; Virginia P Quinn; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Douglas A Corley; Ann G Zauber Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Simon Lucas Goede; Linda Rabeneck; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Ann G Zauber; Lawrence F Paszat; Jeffrey S Hoch; Jean H E Yong; Frank van Hees; Jill Tinmouth; Marjolein van Ballegooijen Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2015-02-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Sonja Kroep; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Joel H Rubenstein; Harry J de Koning; Reinier Meester; John M Inadomi; Marjolein van Ballegooijen Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Theodore R Levin; Douglas A Corley; Christopher D Jensen; Amy R Marks; Wei K Zhao; Alexis M Zebrowski; Virginia P Quinn; Lawrence W Browne; William R Taylor; David A Ahlquist; Graham P Lidgard; Barry M Berger Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2017-01-02 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; S Lucas Goede; Linda J W Bosch; Veerle Melotte; Beatriz Carvalho; Manon van Engeland; Gerrit A Meijer; Harry J de Koning; Marjolein van Ballegooijen Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Alex van der Steen; Amy B Knudsen; Frank van Hees; Gailya P Walter; Franklin G Berger; Virginie G Daguise; Karen M Kuntz; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Dayna R Cenin; D James B St John; Melissa J N Ledger; Terry Slevin; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2014-10-20 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Frank van Hees; Ann G Zauber; Harriët van Veldhuizen; Marie-Louise A Heijnen; Corine Penning; Harry J de Koning; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Gut Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 23.059