Comparative validation and local adaptation of gastric cancer risk assessment models in a large multicenter endoscopic screening cohort in China.

IF 8.7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Xue Li, Ying Chen, Juan Zhu, Wei-Yan Yu, Huan-Qing Tao, Gang Chen, Hui-Zhang Li, Ling-Bin Du
{"title":"Comparative validation and local adaptation of gastric cancer risk assessment models in a large multicenter endoscopic screening cohort in China.","authors":"Xue Li, Ying Chen, Juan Zhu, Wei-Yan Yu, Huan-Qing Tao, Gang Chen, Hui-Zhang Li, Ling-Bin Du","doi":"10.1186/s12916-026-05082-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gastric cancer (GC) is a major public health challenge in China, highlighting the need for effective risk stratification to improve early detection. This study aimed to validate existing GC risk assessment models and develop a locally adapted screening approach for GC and precancerous lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2022 to 2024, a total of 144,329 participants were recruited through a large multicenter endoscopic screening cohort in Zhejiang Province, China, with baseline data collected via interviews and endoscopic examinations. Participants screened in 2022 were used for model development, whereas those screened during 2023-2024 were used for validation and comparative analyses. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression and logistic regression were used to construct a new model and a weighted point-based risk score. Six previously published models were externally validated for comparison across the validation set. Model performance and clinical utility were assessed and compared using area under the curve (AUC), detection rates, and decision curve analysis for both GC and the composite outcome of GC/high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1,419 GC cases were identified in the screening cohort. The newly developed model demonstrated favorable discriminative performance, with an AUC of 0.759 (95% CI: 0.744-0.775) for GC and 0.754 (95% CI: 0.740-0.768) for the composite outcome of GC/HGIN in the validation set. External evaluation of six previously published models showed AUCs ranging from 0.594 (95% CI: 0.558-0.629) to 0.742 (95% CI: 0.725-0.758) for GC, and from 0.602 (95% CI: 0.570-0.635) to 0.744 (95% CI: 0.730-0.759) for GC/HGIN. Risk stratification analyses demonstrated progressively increasing odds of both GC and GC/HGIN across higher-risk quartiles in most evaluated models. In the newly developed model, the highest-risk quartile accounted for 62.25% of GC cases and 58.56% of HGIN cases, indicating substantial enrichment of clinically significant lesions. Decision curve analysis indicated a favorable net benefit of the newly developed model across the evaluated range of threshold probabilities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The newly developed model demonstrated favorable discrimination, stable geographic performance, and effective risk stratification in a large multicenter screening cohort. These findings support its potential utility for risk-adapted GC screening in Chinese populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":9188,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medicine","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13685247/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-026-05082-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is a major public health challenge in China, highlighting the need for effective risk stratification to improve early detection. This study aimed to validate existing GC risk assessment models and develop a locally adapted screening approach for GC and precancerous lesions.

Methods: From 2022 to 2024, a total of 144,329 participants were recruited through a large multicenter endoscopic screening cohort in Zhejiang Province, China, with baseline data collected via interviews and endoscopic examinations. Participants screened in 2022 were used for model development, whereas those screened during 2023-2024 were used for validation and comparative analyses. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression and logistic regression were used to construct a new model and a weighted point-based risk score. Six previously published models were externally validated for comparison across the validation set. Model performance and clinical utility were assessed and compared using area under the curve (AUC), detection rates, and decision curve analysis for both GC and the composite outcome of GC/high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN).

Results: A total of 1,419 GC cases were identified in the screening cohort. The newly developed model demonstrated favorable discriminative performance, with an AUC of 0.759 (95% CI: 0.744-0.775) for GC and 0.754 (95% CI: 0.740-0.768) for the composite outcome of GC/HGIN in the validation set. External evaluation of six previously published models showed AUCs ranging from 0.594 (95% CI: 0.558-0.629) to 0.742 (95% CI: 0.725-0.758) for GC, and from 0.602 (95% CI: 0.570-0.635) to 0.744 (95% CI: 0.730-0.759) for GC/HGIN. Risk stratification analyses demonstrated progressively increasing odds of both GC and GC/HGIN across higher-risk quartiles in most evaluated models. In the newly developed model, the highest-risk quartile accounted for 62.25% of GC cases and 58.56% of HGIN cases, indicating substantial enrichment of clinically significant lesions. Decision curve analysis indicated a favorable net benefit of the newly developed model across the evaluated range of threshold probabilities.

Conclusions: The newly developed model demonstrated favorable discrimination, stable geographic performance, and effective risk stratification in a large multicenter screening cohort. These findings support its potential utility for risk-adapted GC screening in Chinese populations.

中国大型多中心内镜筛查队列中胃癌风险评估模型的比较验证和局部适应性
背景:胃癌(GC)在中国是一个重大的公共卫生挑战,强调需要有效的风险分层以提高早期发现。本研究旨在验证现有的胃癌风险评估模型,并开发适合当地的胃癌和癌前病变筛查方法。方法:从2022年到2024年,通过中国浙江省一个大型多中心内镜筛查队列,共招募了144,329名参与者,通过访谈和内镜检查收集基线数据。2022年筛选的参与者用于模型开发,而2023-2024年筛选的参与者用于验证和比较分析。最小绝对收缩、选择算子回归和逻辑回归构建了一个新的模型和加权的基于点的风险评分。六个先前发布的模型进行了外部验证,以便在验证集中进行比较。使用曲线下面积(AUC)、检出率和GC及GC/高级别上皮内瘤变(HGIN)复合结果的决策曲线分析来评估和比较模型的性能和临床效用。结果:筛查队列中共鉴定出1419例GC病例。新开发的模型具有良好的判别性能,在验证集中,GC的AUC为0.759 (95% CI: 0.744-0.775), GC/HGIN的复合结果为0.754 (95% CI: 0.740-0.768)。对先前发表的6个模型的外部评价显示,GC的auc范围从0.594 (95% CI: 0.558-0.629)到0.742 (95% CI: 0.725-0.758), GC/HGIN的auc范围从0.602 (95% CI: 0.570-0.635)到0.744 (95% CI: 0.730-0.759)。风险分层分析表明,在大多数评估模型中,GC和GC/HGIN在高风险四分位数中的几率逐渐增加。在新建立的模型中,最高风险四分位数占GC病例的62.25%,占HGIN病例的58.56%,表明临床显著病变大量富集。决策曲线分析表明,新开发的模型在评估的阈值概率范围内具有良好的净效益。结论:新开发的模型在一个大型多中心筛查队列中显示出良好的区分,稳定的地理性能和有效的风险分层。这些发现支持其在中国人群中用于风险适应性GC筛查的潜在效用。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medicine
BMC Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
435
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medicine is an open access, transparent peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is the flagship journal of the BMC series and publishes outstanding and influential research in various areas including clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities. In addition to research articles, the journal also publishes stimulating debates, reviews, unique forum articles, and concise tutorials. All articles published in BMC Medicine are included in various databases such as Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAS, Citebase, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, OAIster, SCImago, Scopus, SOCOLAR, and Zetoc.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书