Literature DB >> 26746432

Validation of Models Used to Inform Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Accuracy and Implications.

Carolyn M Rutter1, Amy B Knudsen2, Tracey L Marsh3, V Paul Doria-Rose4, Eric Johnson5, Chester Pabiniak5, Karen M Kuntz6, Marjolein van Ballegooijen7, Ann G Zauber8, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Microsimulation models synthesize evidence about disease processes and interventions, providing a method for predicting long-term benefits and harms of prevention, screening, and treatment strategies. Because models often require assumptions about unobservable processes, assessing a model's predictive accuracy is important.
METHODS: We validated 3 colorectal cancer (CRC) microsimulation models against outcomes from the United Kingdom Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Screening (UKFSS) Trial, a randomized controlled trial that examined the effectiveness of one-time flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to reduce CRC mortality. The models incorporate different assumptions about the time from adenoma initiation to development of preclinical and symptomatic CRC. Analyses compare model predictions to study estimates across a range of outcomes to provide insight into the accuracy of model assumptions.
RESULTS: All 3 models accurately predicted the relative reduction in CRC mortality 10 years after screening (predicted hazard ratios, with 95% percentile intervals: 0.56 [0.44, 0.71], 0.63 [0.51, 0.75], 0.68 [0.53, 0.83]; estimated with 95% confidence interval: 0.56 [0.45, 0.69]). Two models with longer average preclinical duration accurately predicted the relative reduction in 10-year CRC incidence. Two models with longer mean sojourn time accurately predicted the number of screen-detected cancers. All 3 models predicted too many proximal adenomas among patients referred to colonoscopy.
CONCLUSION: Model accuracy can only be established through external validation. Analyses such as these are therefore essential for any decision model. Results supported the assumptions that the average time from adenoma initiation to development of preclinical cancer is long (up to 25 years), and mean sojourn time is close to 4 years, suggesting the window for early detection and intervention by screening is relatively long. Variation in dwell time remains uncertain and could have important clinical and policy implications.
© The Author(s) 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  colorectal cancer; discrete event simulation; gastroenterology; preventive medicine; simulation methods

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26746432      PMCID: PMC5009464          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15622642

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  40 in total

Review 1.  Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Evelyn P Whitlock; Jennifer S Lin; Elizabeth Liles; Tracy L Beil; Rongwei Fu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Clarifying differences in natural history between models of screening: the case of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Carolyn M Rutter; Amy B Knudsen; Ann G Zauber; James E Savarino; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Rob Boer; Eric J Feuer; J Dik F Habbema; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Prevalence of missed adenomas in patients with inadequate bowel preparation on screening colonoscopy.

Authors:  Reena V Chokshi; Christine E Hovis; Thomas Hollander; Dayna S Early; Jean S Wang
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Prevalence of undiagnosed cancer of the large bowel found at autopsy in different races.

Authors:  J W Berg; A Downing; R J Lukes
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1970-05       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Colorectal endoscopy, advanced adenomas, and sessile serrated polyps: implications for proximal colon cancer.

Authors:  Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Polly A Newcomb; Amanda I Phipps; Michael N Passarelli; William M Grady; Melissa P Upton; Lee-Ching Zhu; John D Potter
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Serrated lesions of the colorectum: review and recommendations from an expert panel.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; Dennis J Ahnen; John A Baron; Kenneth P Batts; Carol A Burke; Randall W Burt; John R Goldblum; José G Guillem; Charles J Kahi; Matthew F Kalady; Michael J O'Brien; Robert D Odze; Shuji Ogino; Susan Parry; Dale C Snover; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul E Wise; Joanne Young; James Church
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Amy B Knudsen; Janneke Wilschut; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Screening colonoscopy and risk for incident late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis in average-risk adults: a nested case-control study.

Authors:  Chyke A Doubeni; Sheila Weinmann; Kenneth Adams; Aruna Kamineni; Diana S M Buist; Arlene S Ash; Carolyn M Rutter; V Paul Doria-Rose; Douglas A Corley; Robert T Greenlee; Jessica Chubak; Andrew Williams; Aimee R Kroll-Desrosiers; Eric Johnson; Joseph Webster; Kathryn Richert-Boe; Theodore R Levin; Robert H Fletcher; Noel S Weiss
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Should colorectal cancer screening be considered in elderly persons without previous screening? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Frank van Hees; J Dik F Habbema; Reinier G Meester; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Ann G Zauber
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-06-03       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7.

Authors:  David M Eddy; William Hollingworth; J Jaime Caro; Joel Tsevat; Kathryn M McDonald; John B Wong
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.583

View more
  24 in total

1.  Validation of a Cardiovascular Disease Policy Microsimulation Model Using Both Survival and Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves.

Authors:  Ankur Pandya; Stephen Sy; Sylvia Cho; Sartaj Alam; Milton C Weinstein; Thomas A Gaziano
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  The OncoSim model: development and use for better decision-making in Canadian cancer control.

Authors:  C L Gauvreau; N R Fitzgerald; S Memon; W M Flanagan; C Nadeau; K Asakawa; R Garner; A B Miller; W K Evans; C M Popadiuk; M Wolfson; A J Coldman
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Validation of Colorectal Cancer Models on Long-term Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Maria DeYoreo; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Amy B Knudsen; Karen M Kuntz; Ann G Zauber; Carolyn M Rutter
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Bernt-Peter Robra
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

5.  Impact of adenoma detection on the benefit of faecal testing vs. colonoscopy for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Reinier G S Meester; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Douglas A Corley; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 7.396

6.  Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Amy B Knudsen; Ann G Zauber; Carolyn M Rutter; Steffie K Naber; V Paul Doria-Rose; Chester Pabiniak; Colden Johanson; Sara E Fischer; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  A Need for Change! A Coding Framework for Improving Transparency in Decision Modeling.

Authors:  Fernando Alarid-Escudero; Eline M Krijkamp; Petros Pechlivanoglou; Hawre Jalal; Szu-Yu Zoe Kao; Alan Yang; Eva A Enns
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Effect of Time to Diagnostic Testing for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Abnormalities on Screening Efficacy: A Modeling Study.

Authors:  Carolyn M Rutter; Jane J Kim; Reinier G S Meester; Brian L Sprague; Emily A Burger; Ann G Zauber; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Nicole G Campos; Chyke A Doubeni; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Stephen Sy; Oguzhan Alagoz; Natasha Stout; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Douglas A Corley; Anna N A Tosteson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Modeling in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Assessing External and Predictive Validity of MISCAN-Colon Microsimulation Model Using NORCCAP Trial Results.

Authors:  Maaike Buskermolen; Andrea Gini; Steffie K Naber; Esther Toes-Zoutendijk; Harry J de Koning; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-10-20       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Early detection versus primary prevention in the PLCO flexible sigmoidoscopy screening trial: Which has the greatest impact on mortality?

Authors:  Maryam Doroudi; Robert E Schoen; Paul F Pinsky
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.