Cargando…

Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework

BACKGROUND: Novel diagnostic triage and testing strategies to support early detection of cancer could improve clinical outcomes. Most apparently promising diagnostic tests ultimately fail because of inadequate performance in real-world, low prevalence populations such as primary care or general comm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Walter, Fiona M., Thompson, Matthew J., Wellwood, Ian, Abel, Gary A., Hamilton, William, Johnson, Margaret, Lyratzopoulos, Georgios, Messenger, Michael P., Neal, Richard D., Rubin, Greg, Singh, Hardeep, Spencer, Anne, Sutton, Stephen, Vedsted, Peter, Emery, Jon D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6570853/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31200676
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6
_version_ 1783427311170748416
author Walter, Fiona M.
Thompson, Matthew J.
Wellwood, Ian
Abel, Gary A.
Hamilton, William
Johnson, Margaret
Lyratzopoulos, Georgios
Messenger, Michael P.
Neal, Richard D.
Rubin, Greg
Singh, Hardeep
Spencer, Anne
Sutton, Stephen
Vedsted, Peter
Emery, Jon D.
author_facet Walter, Fiona M.
Thompson, Matthew J.
Wellwood, Ian
Abel, Gary A.
Hamilton, William
Johnson, Margaret
Lyratzopoulos, Georgios
Messenger, Michael P.
Neal, Richard D.
Rubin, Greg
Singh, Hardeep
Spencer, Anne
Sutton, Stephen
Vedsted, Peter
Emery, Jon D.
author_sort Walter, Fiona M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Novel diagnostic triage and testing strategies to support early detection of cancer could improve clinical outcomes. Most apparently promising diagnostic tests ultimately fail because of inadequate performance in real-world, low prevalence populations such as primary care or general community populations. They should therefore be systematically evaluated before implementation to determine whether they lead to earlier detection, are cost-effective, and improve patient safety and quality of care, while minimising over-investigation and over-diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic scoping review of frameworks for the evaluation of tests and diagnostic approaches. RESULTS: We identified 16 frameworks: none addressed the entire continuum from test development to impact on diagnosis and patient outcomes in the intended population, nor the way in which tests may be used for triage purposes as part of a wider diagnostic strategy. Informed by these findings, we developed a new framework, the ‘CanTest Framework’, which proposes five iterative research phases forming a clear translational pathway from new test development to health system implementation and evaluation. CONCLUSION: This framework is suitable for testing in low prevalence populations, where tests are often applied for triage testing and incorporated into a wider diagnostic strategy. It has relevance for a wide range of stakeholders including patients, policymakers, purchasers, healthcare providers and industry. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6570853
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65708532019-06-27 Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework Walter, Fiona M. Thompson, Matthew J. Wellwood, Ian Abel, Gary A. Hamilton, William Johnson, Margaret Lyratzopoulos, Georgios Messenger, Michael P. Neal, Richard D. Rubin, Greg Singh, Hardeep Spencer, Anne Sutton, Stephen Vedsted, Peter Emery, Jon D. BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: Novel diagnostic triage and testing strategies to support early detection of cancer could improve clinical outcomes. Most apparently promising diagnostic tests ultimately fail because of inadequate performance in real-world, low prevalence populations such as primary care or general community populations. They should therefore be systematically evaluated before implementation to determine whether they lead to earlier detection, are cost-effective, and improve patient safety and quality of care, while minimising over-investigation and over-diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic scoping review of frameworks for the evaluation of tests and diagnostic approaches. RESULTS: We identified 16 frameworks: none addressed the entire continuum from test development to impact on diagnosis and patient outcomes in the intended population, nor the way in which tests may be used for triage purposes as part of a wider diagnostic strategy. Informed by these findings, we developed a new framework, the ‘CanTest Framework’, which proposes five iterative research phases forming a clear translational pathway from new test development to health system implementation and evaluation. CONCLUSION: This framework is suitable for testing in low prevalence populations, where tests are often applied for triage testing and incorporated into a wider diagnostic strategy. It has relevance for a wide range of stakeholders including patients, policymakers, purchasers, healthcare providers and industry. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6570853/ /pubmed/31200676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Walter, Fiona M.
Thompson, Matthew J.
Wellwood, Ian
Abel, Gary A.
Hamilton, William
Johnson, Margaret
Lyratzopoulos, Georgios
Messenger, Michael P.
Neal, Richard D.
Rubin, Greg
Singh, Hardeep
Spencer, Anne
Sutton, Stephen
Vedsted, Peter
Emery, Jon D.
Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework
title Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework
title_full Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework
title_fullStr Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework
title_short Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework
title_sort evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the cantest framework
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6570853/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31200676
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6
work_keys_str_mv AT walterfionam evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT thompsonmatthewj evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT wellwoodian evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT abelgarya evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT hamiltonwilliam evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT johnsonmargaret evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT lyratzopoulosgeorgios evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT messengermichaelp evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT nealrichardd evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT rubingreg evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT singhhardeep evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT spenceranne evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT suttonstephen evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT vedstedpeter evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework
AT emeryjond evaluatingdiagnosticstrategiesforearlydetectionofcancerthecantestframework