Muneeb Ul Haq, D. Mark Pritchard, Arthur Sun Myint, Muhammad Ahsan Javed, Carrie A. Duckworth, Ngu Wah Than, Laura J. Bonnett, David M. Hughes
{"title":"Clinical Prediction Models for Contact X-Ray Brachytherapy in Managing Rectal Cancers: A Scoping Review","authors":"Muneeb Ul Haq, D. Mark Pritchard, Arthur Sun Myint, Muhammad Ahsan Javed, Carrie A. Duckworth, Ngu Wah Than, Laura J. Bonnett, David M. Hughes","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Currently, there are no clinically predictive models that can prognosticate the response of rectal cancers to Contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB). This review aims to critically evaluate existing models that have attempted to predict the response of rectal cancer to external beam radiotherapy, with the objective of laying the foundation for the development of a CXB-specific prediction model.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A random-effects meta-analysis was employed to calculate pooled estimates of the discriminative ability of published models. Using the Prediction Model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), each model was evaluated for its risk of bias and applicability. Additionally, the frequency of commonly utilised predictive factors was documented.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Twelve papers discussed fifteen models based on pre-treatment factors. Models predicting response based on the Tumour regression grade (TRG) classified responders as patients who achieved a complete response or near complete response and achieved a pooled AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.74–0.89). Models that predicted pathologic complete response (pCR) had a pooled AUC of 0.76 (95% CI 0.71–0.82). The most utilised predictive parameters were age, tumour grade and T stage. However, these models were prone to significant risk of bias and had limited applicability to the general population.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although the existing models were statistically robust, they lacked broad applicability. This was primarily due to a lack of external validation, which limits their clinical utility. A future CXB-specific model should prioritise dedicated data collection based on pre-calculated sample size and include the predictive factors identified in this review.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"14 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70697","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70697","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Currently, there are no clinically predictive models that can prognosticate the response of rectal cancers to Contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB). This review aims to critically evaluate existing models that have attempted to predict the response of rectal cancer to external beam radiotherapy, with the objective of laying the foundation for the development of a CXB-specific prediction model.
Methods
A random-effects meta-analysis was employed to calculate pooled estimates of the discriminative ability of published models. Using the Prediction Model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), each model was evaluated for its risk of bias and applicability. Additionally, the frequency of commonly utilised predictive factors was documented.
Results
Twelve papers discussed fifteen models based on pre-treatment factors. Models predicting response based on the Tumour regression grade (TRG) classified responders as patients who achieved a complete response or near complete response and achieved a pooled AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.74–0.89). Models that predicted pathologic complete response (pCR) had a pooled AUC of 0.76 (95% CI 0.71–0.82). The most utilised predictive parameters were age, tumour grade and T stage. However, these models were prone to significant risk of bias and had limited applicability to the general population.
Conclusions
Although the existing models were statistically robust, they lacked broad applicability. This was primarily due to a lack of external validation, which limits their clinical utility. A future CXB-specific model should prioritise dedicated data collection based on pre-calculated sample size and include the predictive factors identified in this review.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas:
Clinical Cancer Research
Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations
Cancer Biology:
Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery.
Cancer Prevention:
Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach.
Bioinformatics:
Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers.
Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.