Literature DB >> 29538697

Risk Stratification for Melanoma: Models Derived and Validated in a Purpose-Designed Prospective Cohort.

Catherine M Olsen1,2, Nirmala Pandeya1,2, Bridie S Thompson1, Jean Claude Dusingize1, Penelope M Webb1,2, Adele C Green1,3, Rachel E Neale1,2, David C Whiteman1,2.   

Abstract

Background: Risk stratification can improve the efficacy and cost-efficiency of screening programs for early detection of cancer. We sought to derive a risk stratification tool for melanoma that was suitable for the general population using only self-reported information.
Methods: We used melanoma risk factor information collected at baseline from QSKIN, a prospective cohort study of Queensland adults age 40 to 69 years at recruitment (n = 41 954). We examined two separate outcomes: 1) invasive melanomas and 2) all melanomas (invasive + in situ) obtained through data linkage to the cancer registry. We used stepwise Cox proportional hazards modeling to derive the risk models in a randomly selected two-thirds sample of the data set and assessed model performance in the remaining one-third validation sample.
Results: After a median follow-up of 3.4 years, 655 (1.6%) participants developed melanoma (257 invasive, 398 in situ). The prediction model for invasive melanoma included seven terms. At baseline, the strongest predictors of invasive melanoma were age, sex, tanning ability, number of moles at age 21 years, and number of skin lesions treated destructively. The model for "all melanomas" (ie, invasive and in situ) included five additional terms. Discrimination in the validation data set was high for both models (C-index = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62 to 0.76, and C-index = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.75, respectively), and calibration was acceptable. Conclusions: Such a tool could be used to target surveillance activities to those at highest predicted risk of developing melanoma over a median duration of 3.4 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29538697     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djy023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  9 in total

Review 1.  Genome-wide association studies and polygenic risk scores for skin cancer: clinically useful yet?

Authors:  M R Roberts; M M Asgari; A E Toland
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2019-07-07       Impact factor: 9.302

2.  Using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) to Evaluate Melanoma Prediction Studies.

Authors:  Isabelle Kaiser; Sonja Mathes; Annette B Pfahlberg; Wolfgang Uter; Carola Berking; Markus V Heppt; Theresa Steeb; Katharina Diehl; Olaf Gefeller
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 6.575

Review 3.  Polygenic risk scores to stratify cancer screening should predict mortality not incidence.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Amit Sud; Jonine Bernstein; Richard Houlston
Journal:  NPJ Precis Oncol       Date:  2022-05-30

4.  Development and external validation study of a melanoma risk prediction model incorporating clinically assessed naevi and solar lentigines.

Authors:  K Vuong; B K Armstrong; M Drummond; J L Hopper; J H Barrett; J R Davies; D T Bishop; J Newton-Bishop; J F Aitken; G G Giles; H Schmid; M A Jenkins; G J Mann; K McGeechan; A E Cust
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2019-09-22       Impact factor: 9.302

5.  A risk prediction model for the development of subsequent primary melanoma in a population-based cohort.

Authors:  A E Cust; C Badcock; J Smith; N E Thomas; L E Haydu; B K Armstrong; M H Law; J F Thompson; P A Kanetsky; C B Begg; Y Shi; A Kricker; I Orlow; A Sharma; S Yoo; S F Leong; M Berwick; D W Ollila; S Lo
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 9.302

6.  Targeted Melanoma Screening: Risk Self-Assessment and Skin Self-Examination Education Delivered During Mammography of Women.

Authors:  June K Robinson; Megan Perez; Dalya Abou-El-Seoud; Kathryn Kim; Zoe Brown; Elona Liko-Hazizi; Sarah M Friedewald; Mary Kwasny; Bonnie Spring
Journal:  JNCI Cancer Spectr       Date:  2019-06-28

7.  Reporting Quality of Studies Developing and Validating Melanoma Prediction Models: An Assessment Based on the TRIPOD Statement.

Authors:  Isabelle Kaiser; Katharina Diehl; Markus V Heppt; Sonja Mathes; Annette B Pfahlberg; Theresa Steeb; Wolfgang Uter; Olaf Gefeller
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-26

8.  Risk Prediction Models for Melanoma: A Systematic Review on the Heterogeneity in Model Development and Validation.

Authors:  Isabelle Kaiser; Annette B Pfahlberg; Wolfgang Uter; Markus V Heppt; Marit B Veierød; Olaf Gefeller
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Impact of personal genomic risk information on melanoma prevention behaviors and psychological outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Amelia K Smit; Martin Allen; Brooke Beswick; Phyllis Butow; Hugh Dawkins; Suzanne J Dobbinson; Kate L Dunlop; David Espinoza; Georgina Fenton; Peter A Kanetsky; Louise Keogh; Michael G Kimlin; Judy Kirk; Matthew H Law; Serigne Lo; Cynthia Low; Graham J Mann; Gillian Reyes-Marcelino; Rachael L Morton; Ainsley J Newson; Jacqueline Savard; Lyndal Trevena; Sarah Wordsworth; Anne E Cust
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 8.822

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.