A systematic comparison of microsimulation models of colorectal cancer: the role of assumptions about adenoma progression
- PMID: 21673186
- PMCID: PMC3424513
- DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11408730
A systematic comparison of microsimulation models of colorectal cancer: the role of assumptions about adenoma progression
Abstract
Background: As the complexity of microsimulation models increases, concerns about model transparency are heightened.
Methods: The authors conducted model "experiments" to explore the impact of variations in "deep" model parameters using 3 colorectal cancer (CRC) models. All natural history models were calibrated to match observed data on adenoma prevalence and cancer incidence but varied in their underlying specification of the adenocarcinoma process. The authors projected CRC incidence among individuals with an underlying adenoma or preclinical cancer v. those without any underlying condition and examined the impact of removing adenomas. They calculated the percentage of simulated CRC cases arising from adenomas that developed within 10 or 20 years prior to cancer diagnosis and estimated dwell time-defined as the time from the development of an adenoma to symptom-detected cancer in the absence of screening among individuals with a CRC diagnosis.
Results: The 20-year CRC incidence among 55-year-old individuals with an adenoma or preclinical cancer was 7 to 75 times greater than in the condition-free group. The removal of all adenomas among the subgroup with an underlying adenoma or cancer resulted in a reduction of 30% to 89% in cumulative incidence. Among CRCs diagnosed at age 65 years, the proportion arising from adenomas formed within 10 years ranged between 4% and 67%. The mean dwell time varied from 10.6 to 25.8 years.
Conclusions: Models that all match observed data on adenoma prevalence and cancer incidence can produce quite different dwell times and very different answers with respect to the effectiveness of interventions. When conducting applied analyses to inform policy, using multiple models provides a sensitivity analysis on key (unobserved) "deep" model parameters and can provide guidance about specific areas in need of additional research and validation.
Figures





Comment in
-
Cross-model comparisons to improve the value of modeling: the case of colorectal cancer screening.Med Decis Making. 2011 Jul-Aug;31(4):524-6. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11412195. Med Decis Making. 2011. PMID: 21757647 No abstract available.
-
Using models to make policy: an inflection point?Med Decis Making. 2011 Jul-Aug;31(4):527-9. doi: 10.1177/0272989X11412079. Med Decis Making. 2011. PMID: 21757648 No abstract available.
References
-
- American Cancer Society . Cancer Facts & Figures 2010. American Cancer Society; Atlanta: 2010.
-
- Morson BC. The pathogenesis of colorectal cancer. Introduction. Major Probl Pathol. 1978;10:1–13. - PubMed
-
- Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:130–60. - PubMed
-
- U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:627–37. - PubMed
-
- Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365–71. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials