Cargando…

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

OBJECTIVE: To systematically identify and validate published colorectal cancer risk prediction models that do not require invasive testing in two large population-based prospective cohorts. DESIGN: Models were identified through an update of a published systematic review and validated in the Europea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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 E, 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, Neil, Riboli, Elio, Gunter, Marc J, Aleksandrova, Krasimira Jekova, Tzoulaki, Ioanna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6580880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29615487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315730
_version_ 1783428104751939584
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 E
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, Neil
Riboli, Elio
Gunter, Marc J
Aleksandrova, Krasimira Jekova
Tzoulaki, Ioanna
author_facet 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 E
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, Neil
Riboli, Elio
Gunter, Marc J
Aleksandrova, Krasimira Jekova
Tzoulaki, Ioanna
author_sort Smith, Todd
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To systematically identify and validate published colorectal cancer risk prediction models that do not require invasive testing in two large population-based prospective cohorts. DESIGN: Models 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). RESULTS: The 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. CONCLUSION: Several 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6580880
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65808802019-07-02 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 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 E 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, Neil Riboli, Elio Gunter, Marc J Aleksandrova, Krasimira Jekova Tzoulaki, Ioanna Gut Colon OBJECTIVE: To systematically identify and validate published colorectal cancer risk prediction models that do not require invasive testing in two large population-based prospective cohorts. DESIGN: Models 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). RESULTS: The 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. CONCLUSION: Several 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. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-04 2018-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6580880/ /pubmed/29615487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315730 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2019. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Colon
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 E
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, Neil
Riboli, Elio
Gunter, Marc J
Aleksandrova, Krasimira Jekova
Tzoulaki, Ioanna
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic Colon
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6580880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29615487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315730
work_keys_str_mv AT smithtodd comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT mullerdavidc comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT moonskarelgm comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT crossamandaj comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT johanssonmattias comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT ferraripietro comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT fagherazziguy comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT peeterspetrahm comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT severigianluca comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT husinganika comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT kaaksrudolf comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT tjonnelandanne comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT olsenanja comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT overvadkim comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT bonetcatalina comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT rodriguezbarrancomiguel comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT huertajosemaria comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT barricartegurreaaurelio comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT bradburykathryne comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT trichopoulouantonia comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT bamiachristina comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT orfanosphilippos comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT pallidomenico comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT palavaleria comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT vineispaolo comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT buenodemesquitabas comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT ohlssonbodil comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT harlidsophia comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT vanguelpenbethany comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT skeieguri comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT weiderpasselisabete comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT jenabmazda comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT murphyneil comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT ribolielio comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT guntermarcj comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT aleksandrovakrasimirajekova comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies
AT tzoulakiioanna comparisonofprognosticmodelstopredicttheoccurrenceofcolorectalcancerinasymptomaticindividualsasystematicliteraturereviewandexternalvalidationintheepicandukbiobankprospectivecohortstudies