...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical lung cancer >Risk Prediction Models for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
【24h】

Risk Prediction Models for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review

机译:肺癌风险预测模型:系统评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Many lung cancer risk prediction models have been published but there has been no systematic review or comprehensive assessment of these models to assess how they could be used in screening. We performed a systematic review of lung cancer prediction models and identified 31 articles that related to 25 distinct models, of which 11 considered epidemiological factors only and did not require a clinical input. Another 11 articles focused on models that required a clinical assessment such as a blood test or scan, and 8 articles considered the 2-stage clonal expansion model. More of the epidemiological models had been externally validated than the more recent clinical assessment models. There was varying discrimination, the ability of a model to distinguish between cases and controls, with an area under the curve between 0.57 and 0.879 and calibration, the model's ability to assign an accurate probability to an individual. In our review we found that further validation studies need to be considered; especially for the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial 2012 Model Version (PLCOM2012) and Hoggart models, which recorded the best overall performance. Future studies will need to focus on prediction rules, such as optimal risk thresholds, for models for selective screening trials. Only 3 validation studies considered prediction rules when validating the models and overall the models were validated using varied tests in distinct populations, which made direct comparisons difficult. To improve this, multiple models need to be tested on the same data set with considerations for sensitivity, specificity, model accuracy, and positive predictive values at the optimal risk thresholds. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:许多肺癌风险预测模型已发表,但对这些模型没有系统审查或全面评估,以评估它们如何在筛选中使用。我们对肺癌预测模型进行了系统审查,并确定了31篇与25种不同模型的物品,其中11个仅考虑了流行病学因素并且不需要临床投入。另外11条专注于所需临床评估的模型,例如血液测试或扫描,8条制品被认为是2阶段克隆膨胀模型。更多的流行病学模型已经外部验证,而不是最近的临床评估模型。有不同的歧视,模型区分病例和控制的能力,在0.57和0.879之间的曲线下的区域和校准,模型为个人分配准确概率的能力。在我们的评论中,我们发现需要考虑进一步的验证研究;特别是对于前列腺,肺,结肠直肠和卵巢(PLCO)癌症筛查试验2012型号(PLCOM2012)和Hoggart模型,记录了最佳整体性能。未来的研究需要专注于预测规则,例如最佳风险阈值,用于选择性筛选试验的模型。只有3项验证研究考虑了验证模型时的预测规则,并且整体使用不同群体的各种测试验证了模型,这使得直接比较困难。为了改善这一点,需要在最佳风险阈值下的敏感性,特异性,模型精度和阳性预测值的考虑中测试多种模型。 (c)2016年Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号