Validation of Microsimulation Models against Alternative Model Predictions and Long-Term Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Outcomes of Randomized Controlled Trials

Author:

Lew Jie-Bin12ORCID,Greuter Marjolein J. E.3ORCID,Caruana Michael12,He Emily12,Worthington Joachim2ORCID,St John D. James45,Macrae Finlay A.6,Feletto Eleonora2,Coupé Veerle M. H.3,Canfell Karen72

Affiliation:

1. Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, New South Wales, Australia

2. Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, New South Wales, Australia

3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

4. Department of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

5. Prevention Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

6. Department of Colorectal Medicine and Genetics, and Department of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

7. School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Abstract

Background. This study aimed to assess the validity of 2 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer (CRC), Policy1-Bowel and ASCCA. Methods. The model-estimated CRC risk in population subgroups with different health statuses, “dwell time” (time from incident precancerous polyp to symptomatically detected CRC), and reduction in symptomatically detected CRC incidence after a one-time complete removal of polyps and/or undetected CRC were compared with published findings from 3 well-established models ( MISCAN, CRC-SPIN, and SimCRC). Furthermore, 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that provided screening using a guaiac fecal occult blood test (Funen trial, Burgundy trial, and Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study [MCCCS]) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (NORCCAP, SCORE, and UKFSST) with long-term follow-up were simulated. Model-estimated long-term relative reductions of CRC incidence (RR inc) and mortality (RR mort) were compared with the RCTs’ findings. Results. The Policy1-Bowel and ASCCA estimates showed more similarities to CRC-SPIN and SimCRC. For example, overall dwell times estimated by Policy1-Bowel (24.0 years) and ASCCA (25.3) were comparable to CRC-SPIN (25.8) and SimCRC (25.2) but higher than MISCAN (10.6). In addition, ∼86% of Policy1-Bowel’s and ∼74% of ASCCA’s estimated RR inc and RR mort were consistent with the RCTs’ long-term follow-up findings. For example, at 17 to 18 years of follow-up, the MCCCS reported RR mort of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51–0.83) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.62–0.97) for the annual and biennial screening arm, respectively, and the UKFSST reported RR mort of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.62–0.79) for CRC at all sites and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.46–0.65) for distal CRC. The corresponding model estimates were 0.65, 0.74, 0.81, and 0.61, respectively, for Policy1-Bowel and 0.65, 0.70, 0.75, and 0.58, respectively, for ASCCA. Conclusion. Policy1-Bowel and ASCCA’s estimates are largely consistent with the data included for comparisons, which indicates good model validity.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3