Risk prediction models versus simplified selection criteria to determine eligibility for lung cancer screening: an analysis of German federal-wide survey and incidence data.

IF 5.9 1区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH European Journal of Epidemiology Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Epub Date: 2020-06-27 DOI:10.1007/s10654-020-00657-w
Anika Hüsing, Rudolf Kaaks
{"title":"Risk prediction models versus simplified selection criteria to determine eligibility for lung cancer screening: an analysis of German federal-wide survey and incidence data.","authors":"Anika Hüsing,&nbsp;Rudolf Kaaks","doi":"10.1007/s10654-020-00657-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As randomized trials in the USA and Europe have convincingly demonstrated efficacy of lung cancer screening by computed tomography (CT), European countries are discussing the introduction of screening programs. To maintain acceptable cost-benefit and clinical benefit-to-harm ratios, screening should be offered to individuals at sufficiently elevated risk of having lung cancer. Using federal-wide survey and lung cancer incidence data (2008-2013), we examined the performance of four well-established risk models from the USA (PLCO<sub>M2012</sub>, LCRAT, Bach) and the UK (LLP<sub>2008</sub>) in the German population, comparing with standard eligibility criteria based on age limits, minimal pack years of smoking (or combination of total duration with average intensity) and maximum years since smoking cessation. The eligibility criterion recommended by the United States Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF) would select about 3.2 million individuals, a group equal in size to the upper fifth of ever smokers age 50-79 at highest risk, and to 11% of all adults aged 50-79. According to PLCO<sub>M2012</sub>, the model showing best concordance between numbers of lung cancer cases predicted and reported in registries, persons with 5-year risk ≥ 1.7% included about half of all lung cancer incidence in the full German population. Compared to eligibility criteria (e.g. USPSTF), risk models elected individuals in higher age groups, including ex-smokers with longer average quitting times. Further studies should address how in Germany these shifts may affect expected benefits of CT screening in terms of life-years gained versus the potential harm of age-specific increasing risk of over-diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":11907,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Epidemiology","volume":"35 10","pages":"899-912"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10654-020-00657-w","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-020-00657-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/6/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

As randomized trials in the USA and Europe have convincingly demonstrated efficacy of lung cancer screening by computed tomography (CT), European countries are discussing the introduction of screening programs. To maintain acceptable cost-benefit and clinical benefit-to-harm ratios, screening should be offered to individuals at sufficiently elevated risk of having lung cancer. Using federal-wide survey and lung cancer incidence data (2008-2013), we examined the performance of four well-established risk models from the USA (PLCOM2012, LCRAT, Bach) and the UK (LLP2008) in the German population, comparing with standard eligibility criteria based on age limits, minimal pack years of smoking (or combination of total duration with average intensity) and maximum years since smoking cessation. The eligibility criterion recommended by the United States Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF) would select about 3.2 million individuals, a group equal in size to the upper fifth of ever smokers age 50-79 at highest risk, and to 11% of all adults aged 50-79. According to PLCOM2012, the model showing best concordance between numbers of lung cancer cases predicted and reported in registries, persons with 5-year risk ≥ 1.7% included about half of all lung cancer incidence in the full German population. Compared to eligibility criteria (e.g. USPSTF), risk models elected individuals in higher age groups, including ex-smokers with longer average quitting times. Further studies should address how in Germany these shifts may affect expected benefits of CT screening in terms of life-years gained versus the potential harm of age-specific increasing risk of over-diagnosis.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
确定肺癌筛查资格的风险预测模型与简化的选择标准:德国联邦范围内的调查和发病率数据分析。
随着美国和欧洲的随机试验令人信服地证明了计算机断层扫描(CT)筛查肺癌的有效性,欧洲国家正在讨论引入筛查项目。为了保持可接受的成本-收益和临床收益-危害比,应该对肺癌风险足够高的个体进行筛查。利用联邦范围内的调查和肺癌发病率数据(2008-2013年),我们检查了来自美国(PLCOM2012, LCRAT, Bach)和英国(LLP2008)的四种成熟风险模型在德国人群中的表现,并与基于年龄限制、最小吸烟包年数(或总持续时间与平均强度的组合)和最大戒烟年数的标准资格标准进行了比较。美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)推荐的资格标准将选择大约320万人,这一群体的规模相当于50-79岁最高风险吸烟者的前五分之一,以及50-79岁所有成年人的11%。根据PLCOM2012,该模型在预测的肺癌病例数和登记报告的肺癌病例数之间显示出最好的一致性,5年风险≥1.7%的人约占德国总人口中肺癌发病率的一半。与资格标准(如USPSTF)相比,风险模型选择了较高年龄组的个体,包括平均戒烟时间较长的戒烟者。进一步的研究应该解决在德国,这些变化如何影响CT筛查的预期收益,即获得的寿命与年龄特异性过度诊断风险增加的潜在危害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Epidemiology
European Journal of Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
21.40
自引率
1.50%
发文量
109
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Epidemiology, established in 1985, is a peer-reviewed publication that provides a platform for discussions on epidemiology in its broadest sense. It covers various aspects of epidemiologic research and statistical methods. The journal facilitates communication between researchers, educators, and practitioners in epidemiology, including those in clinical and community medicine. Contributions from diverse fields such as public health, preventive medicine, clinical medicine, health economics, and computational biology and data science, in relation to health and disease, are encouraged. While accepting submissions from all over the world, the journal particularly emphasizes European topics relevant to epidemiology. The published articles consist of empirical research findings, developments in methodology, and opinion pieces.
期刊最新文献
Food colouring additives and cancer incidence in the NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort. CohortCharacteristics: an R package for population characterisation in observational studies using the OMOP common data model. Vegetarian and vegan diets and cancer incidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Impact of hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism on endometrial cancer incidence: results from a large population-based cohort study. A study evaluation framework for measuring cognition: lessons learned in cross-national contexts from four English-speaking aging cohorts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1