4.4 Review

Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

期刊

CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 13-26

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-15-0274

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Institute of Health Research (NIHR)
  2. NIHR
  3. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)
  4. Medical Research Council [MC_UU_12015/4] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. National Institute for Health Research [CL-2012-14-007] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. MRC [MC_UU_12015/4] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Europe and the United States. Survival is strongly related to stage at diagnosis and population-based screening reduces colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Stratifying the population by risk offers the potential to improve the efficiency of screening. In this systematic review we searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for primary research studies reporting or validating models to predict future risk of primary colorectal cancer for asymptomatic individuals. A total of 12,808 papers were identified from the literature search and nine through citation searching. Fifty-two risk models were included. Where reported (n = 37), half the models had acceptable-to-good discrimination (the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, AUROC >0.7) in the derivation sample. Calibration was less commonly assessed (n = 21), but overall acceptable. In external validation studies, 10 models showed acceptable discrimination (AUROC 0.71-0.78). These include two with only three variables (age, gender, and BMI; age, gender, and family history of colorectal cancer). A small number of prediction models developed from case-control studies of genetic biomarkers also show some promise but require further external validation using population-based samples. Further research should focus on the feasibility and impact of incorporating such models into stratified screening programmes. (C) 2015 AACR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据