Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jul-Aug;31(4):540-9.
doi: 10.1177/0272989X11408915. Epub 2011 Jun 14.

Clarifying differences in natural history between models of screening: the case of colorectal cancer

Affiliations

Clarifying differences in natural history between models of screening: the case of colorectal cancer

Marjolein van Ballegooijen et al. Med Decis Making. 2011 Jul-Aug.

Abstract

Background: Microsimulation models are important decision support tools for screening. However, their complexity makes them difficult to understand and limits realization of their full potential. Therefore, it is important to develop documentation that clarifies their structure and assumptions. The authors demonstrate this problem and explore a solution for natural history using 3 independently developed colorectal cancer screening models.

Methods: The authors first project effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of colonoscopy screening for the 3 models (CRC-SPIN, SimCRC, and MISCAN). Next, they provide a conventional presentation of each model, including information on structure and parameter values. Finally, they report the simulated reduction in clinical cancer incidence following a one-time complete removal of adenomas and preclinical cancers for each model. They call this new measure the maximum clinical incidence reduction (MCLIR).

Results: Projected effectiveness varies widely across models. For example, estimated mortality reduction for colonoscopy screening every 10 years from age 50 to 80 years, with surveillance in adenoma patients, ranges from 65% to 92%. Given only conventional information, it is difficult to explain these differences, largely because differences in structure make parameter values incomparable. In contrast, the MCLIR clearly shows the impact of model differences on the key feature of natural history, the dwell time of preclinical disease. Dwell times vary from 8 to 25 years across models and help explain differences in projected screening effectiveness.

Conclusions: The authors propose a new measure, the MCLIR, which summarizes the implications for predicted screening effectiveness of differences in natural history assumptions. Including the MCLIR in the standard description of a screening model would improve the transparency of these models.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CRC incidence after complete removal of adenomas and preclinical cancers prevalent at age 65, as a percentage of the background incidence (100% – MCLIR65 *); calculations for one cohort of individuals with three models representing the US general population: MISCAN, CRC-SPIN and SimCRC. *MCLIR = Maximum Clinical Incidence Reduction

Comment in

References

    1. Song K, Fendrick AM, Ladabaum U. Fecal DNA testing compared with conventional colorectal cancer screening methods: a decision analysis. Gastroenterology. 2004;126(5):1270–9. - PubMed
    1. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Laghi A, Zullo A, Kim DH, Morini S. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with computed tomography colonography: the impact of not reporting diminutive lesions. Cancer. 2007;109(11):2213–21. - PubMed
    1. Vijan S, Hwang EW, Hofer TP, Hayward RA. Which colon cancer screening test? A comparison of costs, effectiveness, and compliance. Am J Med. 2001;111(8):593–601. - PubMed
    1. Knudsen AB, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM, Savarino JE, Van Ballegooijen M, Kuntz KM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of CT colonography screening for colorectal cancer in the Medicare population. J Natl Cancer Institue. 2010 In press. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Ballegooijen M van, Zauber AG, Boer R, Wilschut J, Habbema JDF. At what costs will screening with CT colonography be competitive? A cost-effectiveness approach. Int J Cancer. 2009;124:1161–1168. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types