Aaron P Thrift1, David C Whiteman. 1. Population Health Department, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Growing awareness of the potential to predict a person's future risk of cancer has resulted in the development of numerous algorithms. Such algorithms aim to improve the ability of policy makers, doctors and patients to make rational decisions about behaviour modification or surveillance, with the expectation that this activity will lead to overall benefit. There remains debate however, about whether accurate risk prediction is achievable for most cancers. METHODS: We conducted a brief narrative review of the literature regarding the history and challenges of risk prediction, highlighting our own recent experiences in developing tools for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: While tools for predicting future risk of cardiovascular outcomes have been translated successfully to clinical practice, the experience with cancer risk prediction has been mixed. Models have now been developed and validated for predicting risk of melanoma and cancers of the breast, colo-rectum, lung, liver, oesophagus and prostate, and while several of these have adequate performance at the population-level, none to date have adequate discrimination for predicting risk in individual patients. Challenges of individual risk prediction for cancer are many, and include long latency, multiple risk factors of mostly small effect, and incomplete knowledge of the causal pathways.
BACKGROUND: Growing awareness of the potential to predict a person's future risk of cancer has resulted in the development of numerous algorithms. Such algorithms aim to improve the ability of policy makers, doctors and patients to make rational decisions about behaviour modification or surveillance, with the expectation that this activity will lead to overall benefit. There remains debate however, about whether accurate risk prediction is achievable for most cancers. METHODS: We conducted a brief narrative review of the literature regarding the history and challenges of risk prediction, highlighting our own recent experiences in developing tools for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: While tools for predicting future risk of cardiovascular outcomes have been translated successfully to clinical practice, the experience with cancer risk prediction has been mixed. Models have now been developed and validated for predicting risk of melanoma and cancers of the breast, colo-rectum, lung, liver, oesophagus and prostate, and while several of these have adequate performance at the population-level, none to date have adequate discrimination for predicting risk in individual patients. Challenges of individual risk prediction for cancer are many, and include long latency, multiple risk factors of mostly small effect, and incomplete knowledge of the causal pathways.
Authors: Jacob Kantrowitz; Ansam Sinjab; Li Xu; Tina L McDowell; Smruthy Sivakumar; Wenhua Lang; Sayuri Nunomura-Nakamura; Junya Fukuoka; Georges Nemer; Nadine Darwiche; Hassan Chami; Arafat Tfayli; Ignacio I Wistuba; Paul Scheet; Junya Fujimoto; Avrum E Spira; Humam Kadara Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2018-01-30
Authors: Annemieke Witteveen; Ingrid M H Vliegen; Gabe S Sonke; Joost M Klaase; Maarten J IJzerman; Sabine Siesling Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2015-07-11 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Silvia Carlos; Jokin de Irala; Matt Hanley; Miguel Ángel Martínez-González Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Y M Geurts; A Witteveen; R Bretveld; P M Poortmans; G S Sonke; L J A Strobbe; S Siesling Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-07-04 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Yan Li; Matthew Sperrin; Miguel Belmonte; Alexander Pate; Darren M Ashcroft; Tjeerd Pieter van Staa Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 4.379