Literature DB >> 34548326

Generalizability and Transportability of the National Lung Screening Trial Data: Extending Trial Results to Different Populations.

Kosuke Inoue1,2, William Hsu3,4,5, Onyebuchi A Arah1,6,7, Ashley E Prosper8,4, Denise R Aberle8,4,5, Alex A T Bui8,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) play a central role in evidence-based healthcare. However, the clinical and policy implications of implementing RCTs in clinical practice are difficult to predict as the studied population is often different from the target population where results are being applied. This study illustrates the concepts of generalizability and transportability, demonstrating their utility in interpreting results from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST).
METHODS: Using inverse-odds weighting, we demonstrate how generalizability and transportability techniques can be used to extrapolate treatment effect from (i) a subset of NLST to the entire NLST population and from (ii) the entire NLST to different target populations.
RESULTS: Our generalizability analysis revealed that lung cancer mortality reduction by LDCT screening across the entire NLST [16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4-24)] could have been estimated using a smaller subset of NLST participants. Using transportability analysis, we showed that populations with a higher prevalence of females and current smokers had a greater reduction in lung cancer mortality with LDCT screening [e.g., 27% (95% CI, 11-37) for the population with 80% females and 80% current smokers] than those with lower prevalence of females and current smokers.
CONCLUSIONS: This article illustrates how generalizability and transportability methods extend estimation of RCTs' utility beyond trial participants, to external populations of interest, including those that more closely mirror real-world populations. IMPACT: Generalizability and transportability approaches can be used to quantify treatment effects for populations of interest, which may be used to design future trials or adjust lung cancer screening eligibility criteria. ©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34548326      PMCID: PMC8643314          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-21-0585

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.090


  30 in total

1.  External validity of randomised controlled trials: "to whom do the results of this trial apply?".

Authors:  Peter M Rothwell
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Jan 1-7       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Mortality, survival and incidence rates in the ITALUNG randomised lung cancer screening trial.

Authors:  Eugenio Paci; Donella Puliti; Andrea Lopes Pegna; Laura Carrozzi; Giulia Picozzi; Fabio Falaschi; Francesco Pistelli; Ferruccio Aquilini; Cristina Ocello; Marco Zappa; Francesca M Carozzi; Mario Mascalchi
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 9.139

3.  Transportability of Trial Results Using Inverse Odds of Sampling Weights.

Authors:  Daniel Westreich; Jessie K Edwards; Catherine R Lesko; Elizabeth Stuart; Stephen R Cole
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-10-15       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  The use of propensity scores to assess the generalizability of results from randomized trials.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Stuart; Stephen R Cole; Catherine P Bradshaw; Philip J Leaf
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc       Date:  2001-04-01       Impact factor: 2.483

Review 5.  Evidence for Health Decision Making - Beyond Randomized, Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Thomas R Frieden
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Robust estimation of encouragement-design intervention effects transported across sites.

Authors:  Kara E Rudolph; Mark J van der Laan
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 4.488

7.  Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  Timothy R Church; William C Black; Denise R Aberle; Christine D Berg; Kathy L Clingan; Fenghai Duan; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; David S Gierada; Gordon C Jones; Irene Mahon; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks; Amanda Jain; Sarah Baum
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Harry J de Koning; Rafael Meza; Sylvia K Plevritis; Kevin ten Haaf; Vidit N Munshi; Jihyoun Jeon; Saadet Ayca Erdogan; Chung Yin Kong; Summer S Han; Joost van Rosmalen; Sung Eun Choi; Paul F Pinsky; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Martin C Tammemägi; William D Hazelton; Eric J Feuer; Pamela M McMahon
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 9.  Generalizing Study Results: A Potential Outcomes Perspective.

Authors:  Catherine R Lesko; Ashley L Buchanan; Daniel Westreich; Jessie K Edwards; Michael G Hudgens; Stephen R Cole
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.822

10.  Prolonged lung cancer screening reduced 10-year mortality in the MILD trial: new confirmation of lung cancer screening efficacy.

Authors:  U Pastorino; M Silva; S Sestini; F Sabia; M Boeri; A Cantarutti; N Sverzellati; G Sozzi; G Corrao; A Marchianò
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 32.976

View more
  1 in total

1.  AdaDiag: Adversarial Domain Adaptation of Diagnostic Prediction with Clinical Event Sequences.

Authors:  Tianran Zhang; Muhao Chen; Alex A T Bui
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 8.000

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.