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
. 2022 Sep 8;20(1):302.
doi: 10.1186/s12916-022-02488-w.

External validation of models for predicting risk of colorectal cancer using the China Kadoorie Biobank

Affiliations

External validation of models for predicting risk of colorectal cancer using the China Kadoorie Biobank

Roxanna E Abhari et al. BMC Med. .

Abstract

Background: In China, colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality have been steadily increasing over the last decades. Risk models to predict incident CRC have been developed in various populations, but they have not been systematically externally validated in a Chinese population. This study aimed to assess the performance of risk scores in predicting CRC using the China Kadoorie Biobank (CKB), one of the largest and geographically diverse prospective cohort studies in China.

Methods: Nine models were externally validated in 512,415 participants in CKB and included 2976 cases of CRC. Model discrimination was assessed, overall and by sex, age, site, and geographic location, using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Model discrimination of these nine models was compared to a model using age alone. Calibration was assessed for five models, and they were re-calibrated in CKB.

Results: The three models with the highest discrimination (Ma (Cox model) AUC 0.70 [95% CI 0.69-0.71]; Aleksandrova 0.70 [0.69-0.71]; Hong 0.69 [0.67-0.71]) included the variables age, smoking, and alcohol. These models performed significantly better than using a model based on age alone (AUC of 0.65 [95% CI 0.64-0.66]). Model discrimination was generally higher in younger participants, males, urban environments, and for colon cancer. The two models (Guo and Chen) developed in Chinese populations did not perform better than the others. Among the 10% of participants with the highest risk, the three best performing models identified 24-26% of participants that went on to develop CRC.

Conclusions: Several risk models based on easily obtainable demographic and modifiable lifestyle factor have good discrimination in a Chinese population. The three best performing models have a higher discrimination than using a model based on age alone.

Keywords: Cancer epidemiology; Colorectal cancer; External validation; Risk prediction models.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram of the updated systematic review of risk prediction models for CRC
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Model discrimination for 10-year risk of developing colorectal cancer. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the risk models in A males and females, B males, and C females
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Model discrimination for 10-year risk of developing site-specific colorectal cancer. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting A colon cancer, B rectal cancer, C right-sided colon cancer, and D left-sided colon cancer
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Model discrimination for 10-year risk of developing colorectal cancer by age and geographic location. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the risk models in A younger participants (age < 56 years), B older participants (age ≥ 56), C participants from urban settings, and D participants from rural settings
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Model calibration curves of observed and expected 10-year risk of colorectal cancer in men and women. A Driver risk score, B Guo risk score, C Hong risk score, D Imperiale risk score, and E Ma Point risk score

References

    1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, Zhang S, Zeng H, Bray F, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(2):115–132. doi: 10.3322/caac.21338. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Haghighat S, Sussman DA, Deshpande A. US Preventive services task force recommendation statement on screening for colorectal cancer. JAMA. 2021;326(13):1328. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.13466. - DOI - PubMed
    1. England PH. Bowel cancer screening: programme overview GOV.UK2021 [Available from: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/bowel-cancer-screening-programme-overview#ta....
    1. Logan RF, Patnick J, Nickerson C, Coleman L, Rutter MD, von Wagner C, et al. Outcomes of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England after the first 1 million tests. Gut. 2012;61(10):1439–1446. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300843. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types