Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 169
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Ann Intern Med ; 176(3): 320-332, 2023 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36745885

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In their 2021 lung cancer screening recommendation update, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) evaluated strategies that select people based on their personal lung cancer risk (risk model-based strategies), highlighting the need for further research on the benefits and harms of risk model-based screening. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness of risk model-based lung cancer screening strategies versus the USPSTF recommendation and to explore optimal risk thresholds. DESIGN: Comparative modeling analysis. DATA SOURCES: National Lung Screening Trial; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; U.S. Smoking History Generator. TARGET POPULATION: 1960 U.S. birth cohort. TIME HORIZON: 45 years. PERSPECTIVE: U.S. health care sector. INTERVENTION: Annual low-dose computed tomography in risk model-based strategies that start screening at age 50 or 55 years, stop screening at age 80 years, with 6-year risk thresholds between 0.5% and 2.2% using the PLCOm2012 model. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost-effectiveness efficiency frontier connecting strategies with the highest health benefit at a given cost. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Risk model-based screening strategies were more cost-effective than the USPSTF recommendation and exclusively comprised the cost-effectiveness efficiency frontier. Among the strategies on the efficiency frontier, those with a 6-year risk threshold of 1.2% or greater were cost-effective with an ICER less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Specifically, the strategy with a 1.2% risk threshold had an ICER of $94 659 (model range, $72 639 to $156 774), yielding more QALYs for less cost than the USPSTF recommendation, while having a similar level of screening coverage (person ever-screened 21.7% vs. USPSTF's 22.6%). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES: Risk model-based strategies were robustly more cost-effective than the 2021 USPSTF recommendation under varying modeling assumptions. LIMITATION: Risk models were restricted to age, sex, and smoking-related risk predictors. CONCLUSION: Risk model-based screening is more cost-effective than the USPSTF recommendation, thus warranting further consideration. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute (NCI).


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagen , Análisis de Costo-Efectividad , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Pulmón , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos
2.
JAMA ; 331(22): 1947-1960, 2024 Jun 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38687505

RESUMEN

Importance: The effects of breast cancer incidence changes and advances in screening and treatment on outcomes of different screening strategies are not well known. Objective: To estimate outcomes of various mammography screening strategies. Design, Setting, and Population: Comparison of outcomes using 6 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models and national data on breast cancer incidence, mammography performance, treatment effects, and other-cause mortality in US women without previous cancer diagnoses. Exposures: Thirty-six screening strategies with varying start ages (40, 45, 50 years) and stop ages (74, 79 years) with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) annually, biennially, or a combination of intervals. Strategies were evaluated for all women and for Black women, assuming 100% screening adherence and "real-world" treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated lifetime benefits (breast cancer deaths averted, percent reduction in breast cancer mortality, life-years gained), harms (false-positive recalls, benign biopsies, overdiagnosis), and number of mammograms per 1000 women. Results: Biennial screening with DBT starting at age 40, 45, or 50 years until age 74 years averted a median of 8.2, 7.5, or 6.7 breast cancer deaths per 1000 women screened, respectively, vs no screening. Biennial DBT screening at age 40 to 74 years (vs no screening) was associated with a 30.0% breast cancer mortality reduction, 1376 false-positive recalls, and 14 overdiagnosed cases per 1000 women screened. Digital mammography screening benefits were similar to those for DBT but had more false-positive recalls. Annual screening increased benefits but resulted in more false-positive recalls and overdiagnosed cases. Benefit-to-harm ratios of continuing screening until age 79 years were similar or superior to stopping at age 74. In all strategies, women with higher-than-average breast cancer risk, higher breast density, and lower comorbidity level experienced greater screening benefits than other groups. Annual screening of Black women from age 40 to 49 years with biennial screening thereafter reduced breast cancer mortality disparities while maintaining similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs as for all women. Conclusions: This modeling analysis suggests that biennial mammography screening starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality and increases life-years gained per mammogram. More intensive screening for women with greater risk of breast cancer diagnosis or death can maintain similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs and reduce mortality disparities.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Mamografía , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Edad , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Reacciones Falso Positivas , Incidencia , Tamizaje Masivo , Uso Excesivo de los Servicios de Salud , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Modelos Estadísticos
3.
N Engl J Med ; 383(7): 640-649, 2020 08 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32786189

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is made up of distinct subtypes, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Although overall mortality from lung cancer has been declining in the United States, little is known about mortality trends according to cancer subtype at the population level because death certificates do not record subtype information. METHODS: Using data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) areas, we assessed lung-cancer mortality and linked deaths from lung cancer to incident cases in SEER cancer registries. This allowed us to evaluate population-level mortality trends attributed to specific subtypes (incidence-based mortality). We also evaluated lung-cancer incidence and survival according to cancer subtype, sex, and calendar year. Joinpoint software was used to assess changes in incidence and trends in incidence-based mortality. RESULTS: Mortality from NSCLC decreased even faster than the incidence of this subtype, and this decrease was associated with a substantial improvement in survival over time that corresponded to the timing of approval of targeted therapy. Among men, incidence-based mortality from NSCLC decreased 6.3% annually from 2013 through 2016, whereas the incidence decreased 3.1% annually from 2008 through 2016. Corresponding lung cancer-specific survival improved from 26% among men with NSCLC that was diagnosed in 2001 to 35% among those in whom it was diagnosed in 2014. This improvement in survival was found across all races and ethnic groups. Similar patterns were found among women with NSCLC. In contrast, mortality from SCLC declined almost entirely as a result of declining incidence, with no improvement in survival. This result correlates with limited treatment advances for SCLC in the time frame we examined. CONCLUSIONS: Population-level mortality from NSCLC in the United States fell sharply from 2013 to 2016, and survival after diagnosis improved substantially. Our analysis suggests that a reduction in incidence along with treatment advances - particularly approvals for and use of targeted therapies - is likely to explain the reduction in mortality observed during this period.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidad , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Masculino , Mortalidad/tendencias , Programa de VERF , Factores Sexuales , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
4.
Am J Epidemiol ; 191(12): 2109-2119, 2022 11 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36043397

RESUMEN

The reporting and analysis of population-based cancer statistics in the United States has traditionally been done for counties. However, counties are not ideal for analysis of cancer rates, due to wide variation in population size, with larger counties having considerable sociodemographic variation within their borders and sparsely populated counties having less reliable estimates of cancer rates that are often suppressed due to confidentiality concerns. There is a need and an opportunity to utilize zone design procedures in the context of cancer surveillance to generate coherent, statistically stable geographic units that are more optimal for cancer reporting and analysis than counties. To achieve this goal, we sought to create areas within each US state that are: 1) similar in population size and large enough to minimize rate suppression; 2) sociodemographically homogeneous; 3) compact; and 4) custom crafted to represent areas that are meaningful to cancer registries and stakeholders. The resulting geographic units reveal the heterogeneity of rates that are hidden when reported at the county-level while substantially reducing the need to suppress data. We believe this effort will facilitate more meaningful comparative analysis of cancer rates for small geographic areas and will advance the understanding of cancer burden in the United States.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Densidad de Población , Sistema de Registros
5.
Stat Med ; 41(16): 3102-3130, 2022 07 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35522060

RESUMEN

Since its release of Version 1.0 in 1998, Joinpoint software developed for cancer trend analysis by a team at the US National Cancer Institute has received a considerable attention in the trend analysis community and it became one of most widely used software for trend analysis. The paper published in Statistics in Medicine in 2000 (a previous study) describes the permutation test procedure to select the number of joinpoints, and Joinpoint Version 1.0 implemented the permutation procedure as the default model selection method and employed parametric methods for the asymptotic inference of the model parameters. Since then, various updates and extensions have been made in Joinpoint software. In this paper, we review basic features of Joinpoint, summarize important updates of Joinpoint software since its first release in 1998, and provide more information on two major enhancements. More specifically, these enhancements overcome prior limitations in both the accuracy and computational efficiency of previously used methods. The enhancements include: (i) data driven model selection methods which are generally more accurate under a broad range of data settings and more computationally efficient than the permutation test and (ii) the use of the empirical quantile method for construction of confidence intervals for the slope parameters and the location of the joinpoints, which generally provides more accurate coverage than the prior parametric methods used. We show the impact of these changes in cancer trend analysis published by the US National Cancer Institute.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Recolección de Datos , Humanos , Análisis de Regresión , Proyectos de Investigación , Programas Informáticos
6.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 141, 2022 01 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35057780

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Life expectancy is increasingly incorporated in evidence-based screening and treatment guidelines to facilitate patient-centered clinical decision-making. However, life expectancy estimates from standard life tables do not account for health status, an important prognostic factor for premature death. This study aims to address this research gap and develop life tables incorporating the health status of adults in the United States. METHODS: Data from the National Health Interview Survey (1986-2004) linked to mortality follow-up through to 2006 (age ≥ 40, n = 729,531) were used to develop life tables. The impact of self-rated health (excellent, very good, good, fair, poor) on survival was quantified in 5-year age groups, incorporating complex survey design and weights. Life expectancies were estimated by extrapolating the modeled survival probabilities. RESULTS: Life expectancies incorporating health status differed substantially from standard US life tables and by health status. Poor self-rated health more significantly affected the survival of younger compared to older individuals, resulting in substantial decreases in life expectancy. At age 40 years, hazards of dying for white men who reported poor vs. excellent health was 8.5 (95% CI: 7.0,10.3) times greater, resulting in a 23-year difference in life expectancy (poor vs. excellent: 22 vs. 45), while at age 80 years, the hazards ratio was 2.4 (95% CI: 2.1, 2.8) and life expectancy difference was 5 years (5 vs. 10). Relative to the US general population, life expectancies of adults (age < 65) with poor health were approximately 5-15 years shorter. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable shortage in life expectancy due to poor self-rated health existed. The life table developed can be helpful by including a patient perspective on their health and be used in conjunction with other predictive models in clinical decision making, particularly for younger adults in poor health, for whom life tables including comorbid conditions are limited.


Asunto(s)
Estado de Salud , Esperanza de Vida , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Niño , Preescolar , Humanos , Tablas de Vida , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo , Mortalidad , Mortalidad Prematura , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
7.
JAMA ; 325(19): 1998-2011, 2021 05 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34003219

RESUMEN

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2016 colorectal cancer screening recommendations. Objective: To provide updated model-based estimates of the benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies and to identify strategies that may provide an efficient balance of life-years gained (LYG) from screening and colonoscopy burden to inform the USPSTF. Design, Setting, and Participants: Comparative modeling study using 3 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer screening in a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old US individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer. Exposures: Screening from ages 45, 50, or 55 years to ages 70, 75, 80, or 85 years with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy alone or with FIT, computed tomography colonography, or colonoscopy. All persons with an abnormal noncolonoscopy screening test result were assumed to undergo follow-up colonoscopy. Screening intervals varied by test. Full adherence with all procedures was assumed. Main Outcome and Measures: Estimated LYG relative to no screening (benefit), lifetime number of colonoscopies (burden), number of complications from screening (harms), and balance of incremental burden and benefit (efficiency ratios). Efficient strategies were those estimated to require fewer additional colonoscopies per additional LYG relative to other strategies. Results: Estimated LYG from screening strategies ranged from 171 to 381 per 1000 40-year-olds. Lifetime colonoscopy burden ranged from 624 to 6817 per 1000 individuals, and screening complications ranged from 5 to 22 per 1000 individuals. Among the 49 strategies that were efficient options with all 3 models, 41 specified screening beginning at age 45. No single age to end screening was predominant among the efficient strategies, although the additional LYG from continuing screening after age 75 were generally small. With the exception of a 5-year interval for computed tomography colonography, no screening interval predominated among the efficient strategies for each modality. Among the strategies highlighted in the 2016 USPSTF recommendation, lowering the age to begin screening from 50 to 45 years was estimated to result in 22 to 27 additional LYG, 161 to 784 additional colonoscopies, and 0.1 to 2 additional complications per 1000 persons (ranges are across screening strategies, based on mean estimates across models). Assuming full adherence, screening outcomes and efficient strategies were similar by sex and race and across 3 scenarios for population risk of colorectal cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: This microsimulation modeling analysis suggests that screening for colorectal cancer with stool tests, endoscopic tests, or computed tomography colonography starting at age 45 years provides an efficient balance of colonoscopy burden and life-years gained.


Asunto(s)
Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Modelos Estadísticos , Sangre Oculta , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Colonoscopía/métodos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/etnología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/efectos adversos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Esperanza de Vida , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Riesgo , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Factores Sexuales , Sigmoidoscopía , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X
8.
JAMA ; 325(10): 988-997, 2021 03 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33687469

RESUMEN

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2013 lung cancer screening guidelines, which recommend annual screening for adults aged 55 through 80 years who have a smoking history of at least 30 pack-years and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Objective: To inform the USPSTF guidelines by estimating the benefits and harms associated with various low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants: Comparative simulation modeling with 4 lung cancer natural history models for individuals from the 1950 and 1960 US birth cohorts who were followed up from aged 45 through 90 years. Exposures: Screening with varying starting ages, stopping ages, and screening frequency. Eligibility criteria based on age, cumulative pack-years, and years since quitting smoking (risk factor-based) or on age and individual lung cancer risk estimation using risk prediction models with varying eligibility thresholds (risk model-based). A total of 1092 LDCT screening strategies were modeled. Full uptake and adherence were assumed for all scenarios. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated lung cancer deaths averted and life-years gained (benefits) compared with no screening. Estimated lifetime number of LDCT screenings, false-positive results, biopsies, overdiagnosed cases, and radiation-related lung cancer deaths (harms). Results: Efficient screening programs estimated to yield the most benefits for a given number of screenings were identified. Most of the efficient risk factor-based strategies started screening at aged 50 or 55 years and stopped at aged 80 years. The 2013 USPSTF-recommended criteria were not among the efficient strategies for the 1960 US birth cohort. Annual strategies with a minimum criterion of 20 pack-years of smoking were efficient and, compared with the 2013 USPSTF-recommended criteria, were estimated to increase screening eligibility (20.6%-23.6% vs 14.1% of the population ever eligible), lung cancer deaths averted (469-558 per 100 000 vs 381 per 100 000), and life-years gained (6018-7596 per 100 000 vs 4882 per 100 000). However, these strategies were estimated to result in more false-positive test results (1.9-2.5 per person screened vs 1.9 per person screened with the USPSTF strategy), overdiagnosed lung cancer cases (83-94 per 100 000 vs 69 per 100 000), and radiation-related lung cancer deaths (29.0-42.5 per 100 000 vs 20.6 per 100 000). Risk model-based vs risk factor-based strategies were estimated to be associated with more benefits and fewer radiation-related deaths but more overdiagnosed cases. Conclusions and Relevance: Microsimulation modeling studies suggested that LDCT screening for lung cancer compared with no screening may increase lung cancer deaths averted and life-years gained when optimally targeted and implemented. Screening individuals at aged 50 or 55 years through aged 80 years with 20 pack-years or more of smoking exposure was estimated to result in more benefits than the 2013 USPSTF-recommended criteria and less disparity in screening eligibility by sex and race/ethnicity.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagen , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Anciano , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/efectos adversos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Humanos , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pulmonares/prevención & control , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Teóricos , Medición de Riesgo , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Fumar , Cese del Hábito de Fumar , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/efectos adversos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos
10.
Am J Epidemiol ; 188(7): 1361-1370, 2019 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30989187

RESUMEN

Cohort or period components of trends can provide a rationale for new research or point to clues on the effectiveness of control strategies. Graphical display of trends guides models that quantify the experience of a population. In this paper, a method for smoothing rates by single year of age and year is developed and displayed to show the contributions of period and cohort to trends. The magnitude of the contribution of period and/or cohort in a model for trends may be assessed by the percentage of deviance explained and the relative contributions of cohort (C) and period (P) individually, known as the C-P score. The method is illustrated using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data (1975-2014) on lung and bronchial cancer mortality in females and prostate and colorectal cancer incidence in males. Smoothed age-period and age-cohort rates provide a useful first step in studies of etiology and the impact of disease control without imposing a restrictive model. We found that, in this data set, cohort predominates for female lung and bronchial cancer and period predominates for male prostate cancer. However, the effects change with age for male colorectal cancer incidence, indicating an age shift in relevant exposures. These methods are applied on an interactive website for both incidence and mortality at over 20 cancer sites in the United States.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de los Bronquios/mortalidad , Neoplasias Colorrectales/mortalidad , Modelos Estadísticos , Vigilancia de la Población/métodos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias de los Bronquios/epidemiología , Efecto de Cohortes , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Programa de VERF , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
11.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 17(3): 560-562.e2, 2019 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29753084

RESUMEN

Rates of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) have increased rapidly in the United States and much of western Europe, and 5-year survival continues to be poor.1 Prevention and early detection efforts for EAC have focused on identifying persons with EAC precursor state, Barrett's esophagus, but the survival benefit has been disappointingly low.


Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/diagnóstico , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina/métodos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis de Supervivencia , Estados Unidos
12.
Stat Med ; 38(29): 5528-5546, 2019 12 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31657494

RESUMEN

This paper demonstrates the flexibility of a general approach for the analysis of discrete time competing risks data that can accommodate complex data structures, different time scales for different causes, and nonstandard sampling schemes. The data may involve a single data source where all individuals contribute to analyses of both cause-specific hazard functions, overlapping datasets where some individuals contribute to the analysis of the cause-specific hazard function of only one cause while other individuals contribute to analyses of both cause-specific hazard functions, or separate data sources where each individual contributes to the analysis of the cause-specific hazard function of only a single cause. The approach is modularized into estimation and prediction. For the estimation step, the parameters and the variance-covariance matrix can be estimated using widely available software. The prediction step utilizes a generic program with plug-in estimates from the estimation step. The approach is illustrated with three prognostic models for stage IV male oral cancer using different data structures. The first model uses only men with stage IV oral cancer from population-based registry data. The second model strategically extends the cohort to improve the efficiency of the estimates. The third model improves the accuracy for those with a lower risk of other causes of death, by bringing in an independent data source collected under a complex sampling design with additional other-cause covariates. These analyses represent novel extensions of existing methodology, broadly applicable for the development of prognostic models capturing both the cancer and noncancer aspects of a patient's health.


Asunto(s)
Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bioestadística , Análisis de Datos , Humanos , Incidencia , Almacenamiento y Recuperación de la Información/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Modelos Estadísticos , Neoplasias de la Boca/etiología , Neoplasias de la Boca/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Boca/patología , Análisis Multivariante , Pronóstico , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Análisis de Regresión , Análisis de Supervivencia
13.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 19(1): 3, 2019 01 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30612554

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There are significant challenges to the successful conduct of non-inferiority trials because they require large numbers to demonstrate that an alternative intervention is "not too much worse" than the standard. In this paper, we present a novel strategy for designing non-inferiority trials using an approach for determining the appropriate non-inferiority margin (δ), which explicitly balances the benefits of interventions in the two arms of the study (e.g. lower recurrence rate or better survival) with the burden of interventions (e.g. toxicity, pain), and early and late-term morbidity. METHODS: We use a decision analytic approach to simulate a trial using a fixed value for the trial outcome of interest (e.g. cancer incidence or recurrence) under the standard intervention (pS) and systematically varying the incidence of the outcome in the alternative intervention (pA). The non-inferiority margin, pA - pS = δ, is reached when the lower event rate of the standard therapy counterbalances the higher event rate but improved morbidity burden of the alternative. We consider the appropriate non-inferiority margin as the tipping point at which the quality-adjusted life-years saved in the two arms are equal. RESULTS: Using the European Polyp Surveillance non-inferiority trial as an example, our decision analytic approach suggests an appropriate non-inferiority margin, defined here as the difference between the two study arms in the 10-year risk of being diagnosed with colorectal cancer, of 0.42% rather than the 0.50% used to design the trial. The size of the non-inferiority margin was smaller for higher assumed burden of colonoscopies. CONCLUSIONS: The example demonstrates that applying our proposed method appears feasible in real-world settings and offers the benefits of more explicit and rigorous quantification of the various considerations relevant for determining a non-inferiority margin and associated trial sample size.


Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/métodos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/epidemiología , Simulación por Computador , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Colonoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Proyectos de Investigación
14.
Ann Intern Med ; 169(10): 684-693, 2018 11 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30304504

RESUMEN

Background: Tobacco control efforts implemented in the United States since the 1960s have led to considerable reductions in smoking and smoking-related diseases, including lung cancer. Objective: To project reductions in tobacco use and lung cancer mortality from 2015 to 2065 due to existing tobacco control efforts. Design: Comparative modeling approach using 4 simulation models of the natural history of lung cancer that explicitly relate temporal smoking patterns to lung cancer rates. Setting: U.S. population, 1964 to 2065. Participants: Adults aged 30 to 84 years. Measurements: Models were developed using U.S. data on smoking (1964 to 2015) and lung cancer mortality (1969 to 2010). Each model projected lung cancer mortality by smoking status under the assumption that current decreases in smoking would continue into the future (status quo trends). Sensitivity analyses examined optimistic and pessimistic scenarios. Results: Under the assumption of continued decreases in smoking, age-adjusted lung cancer mortality was projected to decrease by 79% between 2015 and 2065. Concomitantly, and despite the expected growth, aging, and longer life expectancy of the U.S. population, the annual number of lung cancer deaths was projected to decrease from 135 000 to 50 000 (63% reduction). However, 4.4 million deaths from lung cancer are still projected to occur in the United States from 2015 to 2065, with about 20 million adults aged 30 to 84 years continuing to smoke in 2065. Limitation: Projections assumed no changes to tobacco control efforts in the future and did not explicitly consider the potential effect of lung cancer screening. Conclusion: Tobacco control efforts implemented since the 1960s will continue to reduce lung cancer rates well into the next half-century. Additional prevention and cessation efforts will be required to sustain and expand these gains to further reduce the lung cancer burden in the United States. Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidad , Fumar/efectos adversos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Simulación por Computador , Femenino , Humanos , Esperanza de Vida , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Neoplasias Pulmonares/prevención & control , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Fumar/epidemiología , Fumar/tendencias , Cese del Hábito de Fumar , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
15.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 16: E119, 2019 08 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31469068

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: National health surveys, such as the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), collect data on cancer screening and smoking-related measures in the US noninstitutionalized population. These surveys are designed to produce reliable estimates at the national and state levels. However, county-level data are often needed for cancer surveillance and related research. METHODS: To use the large sample sizes of BRFSS and the high response rates and better coverage of NHIS, we applied multilevel models that combined information from both surveys. We also used relevant sources such as census and administrative records. By using these methods, we generated estimates for several cancer risk factors and screening behaviors that are more precise than design-based estimates. RESULTS: We produced reliable, modeled estimates for 11 outcomes related to smoking and to screening for female breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colorectal cancer. The estimates were produced for 3,112 counties in the United States for the data period from 2008 through 2010. CONCLUSION: The modeled estimates corrected for potential noncoverage bias and nonresponse bias in the BRFSS and reduced the variability in NHIS estimates that is attributable to small sample size. The small area estimates produced in this study can serve as a useful resource to the cancer surveillance community.


Asunto(s)
Sistema de Vigilancia de Factor de Riesgo Conductual , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , Neoplasias , Tamaño de la Muestra , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Censos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Encuestas Epidemiológicas/métodos , Encuestas Epidemiológicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/prevención & control , Vigilancia de la Población/métodos , Factores de Riesgo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
16.
Cancer ; 124(10): 2192-2204, 2018 05 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29509274

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute's cancer incidence estimates through 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries' November 2017 submission are released in April 2018. METHODS: Early estimates (February 2017) of cancer incidence rates and trends from the SEER 18 registries for diagnoses in 2000 through 2015 were evaluated with a revised delay-adjustment model, which was used to adjust for the undercount of cases in the early release. For the first time, early estimates were produced for race (whites and blacks) along with estimates for new sites: the oral cavity and pharynx, leukemia, and myeloma. RESULTS: Model validation comparing delay-adjusted rates and trends through 2014 and using 2016 submissions showed good agreement. Differences in trends through 2015 in comparison with those through 2014 were evident. The rate of female breast cancer rose significantly from 2004 to 2015 by 0.3% per year (annual percent change [APC] = 0.3%); the prior trend through 2014 (the same magnitude) was not yet significant. The female colon and rectum cancer trend for whites became flat after previously declining. Lung and bronchus cancer for whites showed a significant decline (APC for males = -2.3%, 2012-2015; APC for females = -0.7%, 2011-2015). Thyroid cancer for black females changed from a continuous rise to a flat final segment (APC = 1.6%, not significant, 2011-2015). Both kidney and renal pelvis cancer (APC = 1.5%, 2011-2015) and childhood cancers (APC = 0.5%, 2000-2015) for white males showed a significant rise in the final segments from previously flat trends. Kidney and renal pelvis cancer for black males showed a change from a significant rise to a flat trend. CONCLUSIONS: The early release of SEER data continues to be useful as a preliminary estimate of the most current cancer incidence trends. Cancer 2018;124:2192-204. © 2018 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Predicción/métodos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Programa de VERF/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Anciano , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
17.
Cancer ; 124(6): 1197-1206, 2018 03 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29211316

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality (rate ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.91). The US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) trial indicated no such reduction but had a wide 95% CI (rate ratio for prostate cancer mortality, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.87-1.36). Standard meta-analyses are unable to account for key differences between the trials that can impact the estimated effects of screening and the trials' point estimates. METHODS: The authors calibrated 2 microsimulation models to individual-level incidence and mortality data from 238,936 men participating in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. A cure parameter for the underlying efficacy of screening was estimated by the models separately for each trial. The authors changed step-by-step major known differences in trial settings, including enrollment and attendance patterns, screening intervals, PSA thresholds, biopsy receipt, control arm contamination, and primary treatment, to reflect a more ideal protocol situation and differences between the trials. RESULTS: Using the cure parameter estimated for the ERSPC, the models projected 19% to 21% and 6% to 8%, respectively, prostate cancer mortality reductions in the ERSPC and PLCO settings. Using this cure parameter, the models projected a reduction of 37% to 43% under annual screening with 100% attendance and biopsy compliance and no contamination. The cure parameter estimated for the PLCO trial was 0. CONCLUSIONS: The observed cancer mortality reduction in screening trials appears to be highly sensitive to trial protocol and practice settings. Accounting for these differences, the efficacy of PSA screening in the PLCO setting is not necessarily inconsistent with ERSPC results. Cancer 2018;124:1197-206. © 2017 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Anciano , Biopsia , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Análisis de Supervivencia , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
18.
Cancer ; 124(13): 2801-2814, 2018 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29786851

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Temporal trends in prostate cancer incidence and death rates have been attributed to changing patterns of screening and improved treatment (mortality only), among other factors. This study evaluated contemporary national-level trends and their relations with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing prevalence and explored trends in incidence according to disease characteristics with stage-specific, delay-adjusted rates. METHODS: Joinpoint regression was used to examine changes in delay-adjusted prostate cancer incidence rates from population-based US cancer registries from 2000 to 2014 by age categories, race, and disease characteristics, including stage, PSA, Gleason score, and clinical extension. In addition, the analysis included trends for prostate cancer mortality between 1975 and 2015 by race and the estimation of PSA testing prevalence between 1987 and 2005. The annual percent change was calculated for periods defined by significant trend change points. RESULTS: For all age groups, overall prostate cancer incidence rates declined approximately 6.5% per year from 2007. However, the incidence of distant-stage disease increased from 2010 to 2014. The incidence of disease according to higher PSA levels or Gleason scores at diagnosis did not increase. After years of significant decline (from 1993 to 2013), the overall prostate cancer mortality trend stabilized from 2013 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: After a decline in PSA test usage, there has been an increased burden of late-stage disease, and the decline in prostate cancer mortality has leveled off. Cancer 2018;124:2801-2814. © 2018 American Cancer Society.


Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Mortalidad/tendencias , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Comités Consultivos/normas , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/normas , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/normas , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Prevalencia , Servicios Preventivos de Salud/normas , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Programa de VERF/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
19.
Biostatistics ; 18(1): 15-31, 2017 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27335117

RESUMEN

In the standard analysis of competing risks data, proportional hazards models are fit to the cause-specific hazard functions for all causes on the same time scale. These regression analyses are the foundation for predictions of cause-specific cumulative incidence functions based on combining the estimated cause-specific hazard functions. However, in predictions arising from disease registries, where only subjects with disease enter the database, disease-related mortality may be more naturally modeled on the time since diagnosis time scale while death from other causes may be more naturally modeled on the age time scale. The single time scale methodology may be biased if an incorrect time scale is employed for one of the causes and an alternative methodology is not available. We propose inferences for the cumulative incidence function in which regression models for the cause-specific hazard functions may be specified on different time scales. Using the disease registry data, the analysis of other cause mortality on the age scale requires left truncating the event time at the age of disease diagnosis, complicating the analysis. In addition, standard Martingale theory is not applicable when combining regression models on different time scales. We establish that the covariate conditional predictions are consistent and asymptotically normal using empirical process techniques and propose consistent variance estimators for constructing confidence intervals. Simulation studies show that the proposed two time scales method performs well, outperforming the single time-scale predictions when the time scale is misspecified. The methods are illustrated with stage III colon cancer data obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program of National Cancer Institute.


Asunto(s)
Mediciones Epidemiológicas , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Humanos
20.
Cancer Causes Control ; 29(2): 279-287, 2018 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29372360

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To develop a composite Cancer Burden Index and produce 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as measures of uncertainties for the index. METHODS: The Kentucky Cancer Registry has developed a cancer burden Rank Sum Index (RSI) to guide statewide comprehensive cancer control activities. However, lack of interval estimates for RSI limits its applications. RSI also weights individual measures with little inherent variability equally as ones with large variability. To address these issues, a Modified Sum Index (MSI) was developed to take into account of magnitudes of observed values. A simulation approach was used to generate individual and simultaneous 95% CIs for the rank MSI. An uncertainty measure was also calculated. RESULTS: At the Area Development Districts (ADDs) level, the ranks of the RSI and the MSI were almost identical, while larger variation was found at the county level. The widths of the CIs at the ADD level were considerably shorter than those at the county level. CONCLUSION: The measures developed for estimating composite cancer burden indices and the simulated CIs provide valuable information to guide cancer prevention and control effort. Caution should be taken when interpreting ranks from small population geographic units where the CIs for the ranks overlap considerably.


Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Humanos , Sistema de Registros
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA