Comparison of prognostic models to predict the occurrence of colorectal cancer in asymptomatic individuals: a systematic literature review and external validation in the EPIC and UK Biobank prospective cohort studies
Author:
Smith Todd, Muller David C, Moons Karel G M, Cross Amanda J, Johansson Mattias, Ferrari Pietro, Fagherazzi Guy, Peeters Petra H M, Severi Gianluca, Hüsing Anika, Kaaks Rudolf, Tjonneland Anne, Olsen Anja, Overvad Kim, Bonet Catalina, Rodriguez-Barranco Miguel, Huerta Jose Maria, Barricarte Gurrea Aurelio, Bradbury Kathryn EORCID, Trichopoulou Antonia, Bamia Christina, Orfanos Philippos, Palli Domenico, Pala Valeria, Vineis Paolo, Bueno-de-Mesquita Bas, Ohlsson Bodil, Harlid Sophia, Van Guelpen Bethany, Skeie Guri, Weiderpass Elisabete, Jenab Mazda, Murphy NeilORCID, Riboli Elio, Gunter Marc J, Aleksandrova Krasimira Jekova, Tzoulaki Ioanna
Abstract
ObjectiveTo systematically identify and validate published colorectal cancer risk prediction models that do not require invasive testing in two large population-based prospective cohorts.DesignModels were identified through an update of a published systematic review and validated in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) and the UK Biobank. The performance of the models to predict the occurrence of colorectal cancer within 5 or 10 years after study enrolment was assessed by discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration (plots of observed vs predicted probability).ResultsThe systematic review and its update identified 16 models from 8 publications (8 colorectal, 5 colon and 3 rectal). The number of participants included in each model validation ranged from 41 587 to 396 515, and the number of cases ranged from 115 to 1781. Eligible and ineligible participants across the models were largely comparable. Calibration of the models, where assessable, was very good and further improved by recalibration. The C-statistics of the models were largely similar between validation cohorts with the highest values achieved being 0.70 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.72) in the UK Biobank and 0.71 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.74) in EPIC.ConclusionSeveral of these non-invasive models exhibited good calibration and discrimination within both external validation populations and are therefore potentially suitable candidates for the facilitation of risk stratification in population-based colorectal screening programmes. Future work should both evaluate this potential, through modelling and impact studies, and ascertain if further enhancement in their performance can be obtained.
Funder
Cancer Research UK German Research Foundation Medical Research Council
Reference43 articles.
1. Ferlay J , Soerjomataram I , Ervik M , et al . GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2013. 2. Colorectal cancer screening: a global overview of existing programmes 3. Holme Ø , Bretthauer M , Fretheim A , et al . Flexible sigmoidoscopy versus faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD009259.doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009259.pub2 4. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Cardiovascular disease: risk assessment and reduction, including lipid modification. Clinical guideline [CG181]. 2014 https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181/chapter/1-recommendations (accessed 4th Aug 2017). 5. Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review
Cited by
35 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|