Cargando…

External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients

INTRODUCTION: Numerous prediction models have been developed to support treatment-related decisions for breast cancer patients. External validation, a prerequisite for implementation in clinical practice, has been performed for only a few models. This study aims to externally validate published clin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hueting, Tom A., van Maaren, Marissa C., Hendriks, Mathijs P., Koffijberg, Hendrik, Siesling, Sabine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10149388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37087910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2023.04.003
_version_ 1785035152031744000
author Hueting, Tom A.
van Maaren, Marissa C.
Hendriks, Mathijs P.
Koffijberg, Hendrik
Siesling, Sabine
author_facet Hueting, Tom A.
van Maaren, Marissa C.
Hendriks, Mathijs P.
Koffijberg, Hendrik
Siesling, Sabine
author_sort Hueting, Tom A.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Numerous prediction models have been developed to support treatment-related decisions for breast cancer patients. External validation, a prerequisite for implementation in clinical practice, has been performed for only a few models. This study aims to externally validate published clinical prediction models using population-based Dutch data. METHODS: Patient-, tumor- and treatment-related data were derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), scaled Brier score, and model calibration. Net benefit across applicable risk thresholds was evaluated with decision curve analysis. RESULTS: After assessing 922 models, 87 (9%) were included for validation. Models were excluded due to an incomplete model description (n = 262 (28%)), lack of required data (n = 521 (57%)), previously validated or developed with NCR data (n = 45 (5%)), or the associated NCR sample size was insufficient (n = 7 (1%)). The included models predicted survival (33 (38%) overall, 27 (31%) breast cancer-specific, and 3 (3%) other cause-specific), locoregional recurrence (n = 7 (8%)), disease free survival (n = 7 (8%)), metastases (n = 5 (6%)), lymph node involvement (n = 3 (3%)), pathologic complete response (n = 1 (1%)), and surgical margins (n = 1 (1%)). Seven models (8%) showed poor (AUC<0.6), 39 (45%) moderate (AUC:0.6–0.7), 38 (46%) good (AUC:0.7–0.9), and 3 (3%) excellent (AUC≥0.9) discrimination. Using the scaled Brier score, worse performance than an uninformative model was found in 34 (39%) models. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive registry data supports broad validation of published prediction models. Model performance varies considerably in new patient populations, affirming the importance of external validation studies before applying models in clinical practice. Well performing models could be clinically useful in a Dutch setting after careful impact evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10149388
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101493882023-05-02 External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients Hueting, Tom A. van Maaren, Marissa C. Hendriks, Mathijs P. Koffijberg, Hendrik Siesling, Sabine Breast Original Article INTRODUCTION: Numerous prediction models have been developed to support treatment-related decisions for breast cancer patients. External validation, a prerequisite for implementation in clinical practice, has been performed for only a few models. This study aims to externally validate published clinical prediction models using population-based Dutch data. METHODS: Patient-, tumor- and treatment-related data were derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), scaled Brier score, and model calibration. Net benefit across applicable risk thresholds was evaluated with decision curve analysis. RESULTS: After assessing 922 models, 87 (9%) were included for validation. Models were excluded due to an incomplete model description (n = 262 (28%)), lack of required data (n = 521 (57%)), previously validated or developed with NCR data (n = 45 (5%)), or the associated NCR sample size was insufficient (n = 7 (1%)). The included models predicted survival (33 (38%) overall, 27 (31%) breast cancer-specific, and 3 (3%) other cause-specific), locoregional recurrence (n = 7 (8%)), disease free survival (n = 7 (8%)), metastases (n = 5 (6%)), lymph node involvement (n = 3 (3%)), pathologic complete response (n = 1 (1%)), and surgical margins (n = 1 (1%)). Seven models (8%) showed poor (AUC<0.6), 39 (45%) moderate (AUC:0.6–0.7), 38 (46%) good (AUC:0.7–0.9), and 3 (3%) excellent (AUC≥0.9) discrimination. Using the scaled Brier score, worse performance than an uninformative model was found in 34 (39%) models. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive registry data supports broad validation of published prediction models. Model performance varies considerably in new patient populations, affirming the importance of external validation studies before applying models in clinical practice. Well performing models could be clinically useful in a Dutch setting after careful impact evaluation. Elsevier 2023-04-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10149388/ /pubmed/37087910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2023.04.003 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Hueting, Tom A.
van Maaren, Marissa C.
Hendriks, Mathijs P.
Koffijberg, Hendrik
Siesling, Sabine
External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
title External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
title_full External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
title_fullStr External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
title_short External validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
title_sort external validation of 87 clinical prediction models supporting clinical decisions for breast cancer patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10149388/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37087910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2023.04.003
work_keys_str_mv AT huetingtoma externalvalidationof87clinicalpredictionmodelssupportingclinicaldecisionsforbreastcancerpatients
AT vanmaarenmarissac externalvalidationof87clinicalpredictionmodelssupportingclinicaldecisionsforbreastcancerpatients
AT hendriksmathijsp externalvalidationof87clinicalpredictionmodelssupportingclinicaldecisionsforbreastcancerpatients
AT koffijberghendrik externalvalidationof87clinicalpredictionmodelssupportingclinicaldecisionsforbreastcancerpatients
AT sieslingsabine externalvalidationof87clinicalpredictionmodelssupportingclinicaldecisionsforbreastcancerpatients