Literature DB >> 25851283

A prediction model for colon cancer surveillance data.

Norm M Good1, Krithika Suresh2, Graeme P Young3, Trevor J Lockett4, Finlay A Macrae5, Jeremy M G Taylor2.   

Abstract

Dynamic prediction models make use of patient-specific longitudinal data to update individualized survival probability predictions based on current and past information. Colonoscopy (COL) and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) results were collected from two Australian surveillance studies on individuals characterized as high-risk based on a personal or family history of colorectal cancer. Motivated by a Poisson process, this paper proposes a generalized nonlinear model with a complementary log-log link as a dynamic prediction tool that produces individualized probabilities for the risk of developing advanced adenoma or colorectal cancer (AAC). This model allows predicted risk to depend on a patient's baseline characteristics and time-dependent covariates. Information on the dates and results of COLs and FOBTs were incorporated using time-dependent covariates that contributed to patient risk of AAC for a specified period following the test result. These covariates serve to update a person's risk as additional COL, and FOBT test information becomes available. Model selection was conducted systematically through the comparison of Akaike information criterion. Goodness-of-fit was assessed with the use of calibration plots to compare the predicted probability of event occurrence with the proportion of events observed. Abnormal COL results were found to significantly increase risk of AAC for 1 year following the test. Positive FOBTs were found to significantly increase the risk of AAC for 3 months following the result. The covariates that incorporated the updated test results were of greater significance and had a larger effect on risk than the baseline variables.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Poisson process; adenoma; cancer surveillance; colonoscopy; complementary log-log link; interval censored

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25851283      PMCID: PMC4494883          DOI: 10.1002/sim.6500

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  17 in total

1.  Yield from colonoscopic screening in people with a strong family history of common colorectal cancer.

Authors:  D J Dowling; D J St John; F A Macrae; J L Hopper
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 4.029

Review 2.  The advanced adenoma as the primary target of screening.

Authors:  Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2002-01

3.  Cancer risk in young women at risk of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: implications for gynecologic surveillance.

Authors:  G J Brown; D J St John; F A Macrae; K Aittomäki
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population.

Authors:  A L Frazier; G A Colditz; C S Fuchs; K M Kuntz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-10-18       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Ideal colonoscopic surveillance intervals to reduce incidence of advanced adenoma and colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Norm M Good; Finlay A Macrae; Graeme P Young; John O'Dywer; Masha Slattery; William Venables; Trevor J Lockett; Marilla O'Dwyer
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.029

Review 6.  The adenoma-carcinoma sequence.

Authors:  D W Day; B C Morson
Journal:  Major Probl Pathol       Date:  1978

7.  Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening: comparison of community-based flexible sigmoidoscopy with fecal occult blood testing and colonoscopy.

Authors:  Beth A O'Leary; John K Olynyk; A Munro Neville; Cameron F Platell
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.029

8.  Real-time individual predictions of prostate cancer recurrence using joint models.

Authors:  Jeremy M G Taylor; Yongseok Park; Donna P Ankerst; Cecile Proust-Lima; Scott Williams; Larry Kestin; Kyoungwha Bae; Tom Pickles; Howard Sandler
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  A comparison of fecal occult-blood tests for colorectal-cancer screening.

Authors:  J E Allison; I S Tekawa; L J Ransom; A L Adrain
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-01-18       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Cost-effectiveness model for colon cancer screening.

Authors:  D A Lieberman
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Estimating the Effect of Targeted Screening Strategies: An Application to Colonoscopy and Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Duncan C Thomas
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  Outcomes of screening and surveillance in people with two parents affected by colorectal cancers: experiences from the Familial Bowel Cancer Service.

Authors:  Jennifer Pan; Masha Slattery; Natalie Shea; Finlay Macrae
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 2.857

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.