Cargando…

Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to systematically assess lung cancer risk prediction models by critical evaluation of methodology, transparency and validation in order to provide a direction for future model development. METHODS: Electronic searches (including PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Web...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tang, Wei, Peng, Qin, Lyu, Yanzhang, Feng, Xiaoshuang, Li, Xin, Wei, Luopei, Li, Ni, Chen, Hongda, Chen, Wanqing, Dai, Min, Wu, Ning, Li, Jiang, Huang, Yao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6513747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31156302
http://dx.doi.org/10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2019.02.06
_version_ 1783417755541700608
author Tang, Wei
Peng, Qin
Lyu, Yanzhang
Feng, Xiaoshuang
Li, Xin
Wei, Luopei
Li, Ni
Chen, Hongda
Chen, Wanqing
Dai, Min
Wu, Ning
Li, Jiang
Huang, Yao
author_facet Tang, Wei
Peng, Qin
Lyu, Yanzhang
Feng, Xiaoshuang
Li, Xin
Wei, Luopei
Li, Ni
Chen, Hongda
Chen, Wanqing
Dai, Min
Wu, Ning
Li, Jiang
Huang, Yao
author_sort Tang, Wei
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The objective was to systematically assess lung cancer risk prediction models by critical evaluation of methodology, transparency and validation in order to provide a direction for future model development. METHODS: Electronic searches (including PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, and other official cancer websites) were completed with English and Chinese databases until April 30th, 2018. Main reported sources were input data, assumptions and sensitivity analysis. Model validation was based on statements in the publications regarding internal validation, external validation and/or cross-validation. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (containing 11 multiple-use and 11 single-use models) were included. Original models were developed between 2003 and 2016. Most of these were from the United States. Multivariate logistic regression was widely used to identify a model. The minimum area under the curve for each model was 0.57 and the largest was 0.87. The smallest C statistic was 0.59 and the largest 0.85. Six studies were validated by external validation and three were cross-validated. In total, 2 models had a high risk of bias, 6 models reported the most used variables were age and smoking duration, and 5 models included family history of lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The prediction accuracy of the models was high overall, indicating that it is feasible to use models for high-risk population prediction. However, the process of model development and reporting is not optimal with a high risk of bias. This risk affects prediction accuracy, influencing the promotion and further development of the model. In view of this, model developers need to be more attentive to bias risk control and validity verification in the development of models.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6513747
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65137472019-05-31 Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination Tang, Wei Peng, Qin Lyu, Yanzhang Feng, Xiaoshuang Li, Xin Wei, Luopei Li, Ni Chen, Hongda Chen, Wanqing Dai, Min Wu, Ning Li, Jiang Huang, Yao Chin J Cancer Res Original Article OBJECTIVE: The objective was to systematically assess lung cancer risk prediction models by critical evaluation of methodology, transparency and validation in order to provide a direction for future model development. METHODS: Electronic searches (including PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, and other official cancer websites) were completed with English and Chinese databases until April 30th, 2018. Main reported sources were input data, assumptions and sensitivity analysis. Model validation was based on statements in the publications regarding internal validation, external validation and/or cross-validation. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (containing 11 multiple-use and 11 single-use models) were included. Original models were developed between 2003 and 2016. Most of these were from the United States. Multivariate logistic regression was widely used to identify a model. The minimum area under the curve for each model was 0.57 and the largest was 0.87. The smallest C statistic was 0.59 and the largest 0.85. Six studies were validated by external validation and three were cross-validated. In total, 2 models had a high risk of bias, 6 models reported the most used variables were age and smoking duration, and 5 models included family history of lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The prediction accuracy of the models was high overall, indicating that it is feasible to use models for high-risk population prediction. However, the process of model development and reporting is not optimal with a high risk of bias. This risk affects prediction accuracy, influencing the promotion and further development of the model. In view of this, model developers need to be more attentive to bias risk control and validity verification in the development of models. AME Publishing Company 2019-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6513747/ /pubmed/31156302 http://dx.doi.org/10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2019.02.06 Text en Copyright © 2019 Chinese Journal of Cancer Research. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
spellingShingle Original Article
Tang, Wei
Peng, Qin
Lyu, Yanzhang
Feng, Xiaoshuang
Li, Xin
Wei, Luopei
Li, Ni
Chen, Hongda
Chen, Wanqing
Dai, Min
Wu, Ning
Li, Jiang
Huang, Yao
Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination
title Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination
title_full Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination
title_fullStr Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination
title_full_unstemmed Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination
title_short Risk prediction models for lung cancer: Perspectives and dissemination
title_sort risk prediction models for lung cancer: perspectives and dissemination
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6513747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31156302
http://dx.doi.org/10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2019.02.06
work_keys_str_mv AT tangwei riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT pengqin riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT lyuyanzhang riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT fengxiaoshuang riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT lixin riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT weiluopei riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT lini riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT chenhongda riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT chenwanqing riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT daimin riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT wuning riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT lijiang riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination
AT huangyao riskpredictionmodelsforlungcancerperspectivesanddissemination