Article

An Expanded Risk Prediction Model for Lung Cancer

Department of Epidemiology, Unit 1340, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, P.O. Box 301439, Houston, TX 77230-1439, USA.
Cancer Prevention Research (Impact Factor: 5.27). 10/2008; 1(4):250-4. DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-08-0060
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Risk prediction models are useful in clinical decision making. We have published an internally validated prediction tool for lung cancer based on easily obtainable epidemiologic and clinical data. Because the precision of the model was modest, we now estimate the improvement obtained by adding two markers of DNA repair capacity. Assay data (host-cell reactivation and mutagen sensitivity) were available for 725 White lung cancer cases and 615 controls, all former or current smokers, a subset of cases and controls from the previous analysis. Multivariable models were constructed from the original variables with addition of the biomarkers separately and together. Pairwise comparisons of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) and 3-fold cross-validations were done. For former smokers, the AUC and 95% confidence intervals were 0.67 (0.63-0.71) for the baseline model and 0.70 (0.66-0.74) for the expanded model. For current smokers, the comparable AUC values were 0.68 (0.64-0.72) and 0.73 (0.69-0.77). For both groups, the expanded models were statistically significantly better than the baseline models (P = 0.006 and P = 0.0048, respectively), although the increases in the concordance statistics were modest. We also recomputed 1-year absolute risks of lung cancer as described previously for two different risk profiles and showed that individuals who exhibited poor repair capacity or heightened mutagen sensitivity had increased absolute risks of lung cancer. Addition of biomarker assays improved the sensitivity of the expanded models.

0 Followers
 · 
77 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The UK has poor lung cancer survival rates and high early mortality, compared to other countries. We aimed to identify factors associated with early death, and features of primary care that might contribute to late diagnosis.
    Thorax 10/2014; 70(2). DOI:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2014-205692 · 8.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Screening for lung cancer with low dose computed tomography can reduce mortality from the disease by 20% in high risk smokers. This review covers the state of the art knowledge on several aspects of implementing a screening program. The most important are to identify people who are at high enough risk to warrant screening and the appropriate management of lung nodules found at screening. An accurate risk prediction model is more efficient than age and pack years of smoking alone at identifying those who will develop lung cancer and die from the disease. Algorithms are available for assessing people who screen positive to determine who needs additional imaging or invasive investigations. Concerns about low dose computed tomography screening include false positive results, overdiagnosis, radiation exposure, and costs. Further work is needed to define the frequency and duration of screening and to refine risk prediction models so that they can be used to assess the risk of lung cancer in special populations. Another important area is the use of computer vision software tools to facilitate high throughput interpretation of low dose computed tomography images so that costs can be reduced and the consistency of scan interpretation can be improved. Sufficient data are available to support the implementation of screening programs at the population level in stages that can be expanded when found to perform well to improve the outcome of patients with lung cancer.
    BMJ Clinical Research 05/2014; 348:g2253. DOI:10.1136/bmj.g2253 · 14.09 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Existing predictive models for lung cancer focus on improving screening or referral for biopsy in general medical populations. A predictive model calibrated for use during preoperative evaluation of suspicious lung lesions is needed to reduce unnecessary operations for a benign disease. A clinical prediction model (Thoracic Research Evaluation And Treatment [TREAT]) is proposed for this purpose. Methods: We developed and internally validated a clinical prediction model for lung cancer in a prospective cohort evaluated at our institution. Best statistical practices were used to construct, evaluate, and validate the logistic regression model in the presence of missing covariate data using bootstrap and optimism corrected techniques. The TREAT model was externally validated in a retrospectively collected Veteran Affairs population. The discrimination and calibration of the model was estimated and compared with the Mayo Clinic model in both the populations. Results: The TREAT model was developed in 492 patients from Vanderbilt whose lung cancer prevalence was 72% and validated among 226 Veteran Affairs patients with a lung cancer prevalence of 93%. In the development cohort, the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and Brier score were 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.92) and 0.12, respectively compared with the AUC 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79-0.98) and Brier score 0.13 in the validation dataset. The TREAT model had significantly higher accuracy (p < 0.001) and better calibration than the Mayo Clinic model (AUC = 0.80; 95% CI, 75-85; Brier score = 0.17). Conclusion: The validated TREAT model had better diagnostic accuracy than the Mayo Clinic model in preoperative assessment of suspicious lung lesions in a population being evaluated for lung resection.
    Journal of thoracic oncology: official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 08/2014; 9(10). DOI:10.1097/JTO.0000000000000287 · 5.80 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from