Estimating Cancer Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Using Healthcare Utilization Data: Defining the Accuracy Assessment Interval
- PMID: 35916602
- PMCID: PMC9484579
- DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0232
Estimating Cancer Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Using Healthcare Utilization Data: Defining the Accuracy Assessment Interval
Abstract
The effectiveness and efficiency of cancer screening in real-world settings depend on many factors, including test sensitivity and specificity. Outside of select experimental studies, not everyone receives a gold standard test that can serve as a comparator in estimating screening test accuracy. Thus, many studies of screening test accuracy use the passage of time to infer whether or not cancer was present at the time of the screening test, particularly for patients with a negative screening test. We define the accuracy assessment interval as the period of time after a screening test that is used to estimate the test's accuracy. We describe how the length of this interval may bias sensitivity and specificity estimates. We call for future research to quantify bias and uncertainty in accuracy estimates and to provide guidance on setting accuracy assessment interval lengths for different cancers and screening modalities.
©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.
Similar articles
-
Diagnostic test accuracy of telehealth assessment for dementia and mild cognitive impairment.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jul 20;7(7):CD013786. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013786.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021. PMID: 34282852 Free PMC article.
-
Fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening: an evidence-based analysis.Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009;9(10):1-40. Epub 2009 Sep 1. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009. PMID: 23074514 Free PMC article.
-
Screening tests for active pulmonary tuberculosis in children.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jun 28;6(6):CD013693. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013693.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021. PMID: 34180536 Free PMC article.
-
Thoracic imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Nov 26;11:CD013639. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013639.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 16;3:CD013639. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013639.pub4. PMID: 33242342 Updated.
-
A new method to address verification bias in studies of clinical screening tests: cervical cancer screening assays as an example.J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Mar;67(3):343-53. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.09.013. Epub 2013 Dec 12. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014. PMID: 24332397 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
GUIDE: a prospective cohort study for blood-based early detection of gastrointestinal cancers using targeted DNA methylation and fragmentomics sequencing.Mol Cancer. 2025 Jun 5;24(1):163. doi: 10.1186/s12943-025-02367-x. Mol Cancer. 2025. PMID: 40468355 Free PMC article.
-
AI Applied to Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Profiles from Exhaled Breath Air for Early Detection of Lung Cancer.Cancers (Basel). 2024 Jun 12;16(12):2200. doi: 10.3390/cancers16122200. Cancers (Basel). 2024. PMID: 38927906 Free PMC article.
-
Deep learning-based electrical impedance spectroscopy analysis for malignant and potentially malignant oral disorder detection.Sci Rep. 2025 Jun 3;15(1):19458. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-05116-8. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID: 40461631 Free PMC article.
-
Revisiting the standard blueprint for biomarker development to address emerging cancer early detection technologies.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2024 Feb 8;116(2):189-193. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djad227. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2024. PMID: 37941446 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Pepe MS, Alonzo TA. Comparing disease screening tests when true disease status is ascertained only for screen positives. Biostatistics 2001; 2:249–60. - PubMed
-
- O’Sullivan JW, Banerjee A, Heneghan C, Pluddemann A. Verification bias. BMJ Evid Based Med 2018; 23:54–5. - PubMed
-
- Lin JS, Piper MA, Perdue LA, Rutter CM, Webber EM, O’Connor E, et al. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2016; 315:2576–94. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous