从算法到临床实用性:结直肠癌个体化风险预测模型的系统回顾

Deborah Jael Herrera, W. van de Veerdonk, Daiane Maria Seibert, M. Boke, Claudia Gutiérrez-Ortiz, N. Yimer, Karen Feyen, Allegra Ferrari, G. Van Hal
{"title":"从算法到临床实用性:结直肠癌个体化风险预测模型的系统回顾","authors":"Deborah Jael Herrera, W. van de Veerdonk, Daiane Maria Seibert, M. Boke, Claudia Gutiérrez-Ortiz, N. Yimer, Karen Feyen, Allegra Ferrari, G. Van Hal","doi":"10.3390/gidisord5040045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individualized risk prediction models for colorectal cancer (CRC) play a pivotal role in shaping risk-based screening approaches, garnering attention for use in informed decision making by patients and clinicians. While the incorporation of new predictors and the development of advanced yet complex prediction models can enhance model performance, their practical implementation in clinical settings remains challenging. This systematic review assessed individualized CRC risk prediction models for their validity and potential clinical utility. Utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration methods and PROBAST tool, we conducted comprehensive searches across key databases and risk of bias assessment, respectively. Out of 41 studies included evaluating 44 risk prediction models, 12 conventional and 3 composite models underwent external validation. All risk models exhibited varying discriminatory accuracy, with the area under the curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.57 to 0.90. However, most studies showed an unclear or high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability. Of the five models with promising clinical utility, only two underwent external validation and one employed a decision curve analysis. These models demonstrated a discriminating and well-calibrated performance. While high-performing CRC risk prediction models exist, a need for transparent reporting of performance metrics and their clinical utility persists. Further research on this area is needed to facilitate the integration of these models into clinical practice, particularly in CRC screening.","PeriodicalId":507842,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Algorithms to Clinical Utility: A Systematic Review of Individualized Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer\",\"authors\":\"Deborah Jael Herrera, W. van de Veerdonk, Daiane Maria Seibert, M. Boke, Claudia Gutiérrez-Ortiz, N. Yimer, Karen Feyen, Allegra Ferrari, G. Van Hal\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/gidisord5040045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Individualized risk prediction models for colorectal cancer (CRC) play a pivotal role in shaping risk-based screening approaches, garnering attention for use in informed decision making by patients and clinicians. While the incorporation of new predictors and the development of advanced yet complex prediction models can enhance model performance, their practical implementation in clinical settings remains challenging. This systematic review assessed individualized CRC risk prediction models for their validity and potential clinical utility. Utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration methods and PROBAST tool, we conducted comprehensive searches across key databases and risk of bias assessment, respectively. Out of 41 studies included evaluating 44 risk prediction models, 12 conventional and 3 composite models underwent external validation. All risk models exhibited varying discriminatory accuracy, with the area under the curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.57 to 0.90. However, most studies showed an unclear or high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability. Of the five models with promising clinical utility, only two underwent external validation and one employed a decision curve analysis. These models demonstrated a discriminating and well-calibrated performance. While high-performing CRC risk prediction models exist, a need for transparent reporting of performance metrics and their clinical utility persists. Further research on this area is needed to facilitate the integration of these models into clinical practice, particularly in CRC screening.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastrointestinal Disorders\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastrointestinal Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/gidisord5040045\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/gidisord5040045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

结直肠癌(CRC)的个体化风险预测模型在形成基于风险的筛查方法方面发挥着关键作用,在患者和临床医生的知情决策中备受关注。虽然纳入新的预测因子和开发先进而复杂的预测模型可以提高模型的性能,但在临床环境中实际应用这些模型仍具有挑战性。本系统综述评估了个体化 CRC 风险预测模型的有效性和潜在临床实用性。利用 Cochrane 协作方法和 PROBAST 工具,我们分别对主要数据库进行了全面检索和偏倚风险评估。在纳入评估 44 个风险预测模型的 41 项研究中,12 个常规模型和 3 个复合模型经过了外部验证。所有风险模型都表现出不同的判别准确性,曲线下面积(AUC)从 0.57 到 0.90 不等。然而,大多数研究显示偏倚风险不明确或偏倚风险较高,适用性令人担忧。在五个有临床应用前景的模型中,只有两个经过了外部验证,一个采用了决策曲线分析。这些模型表现出了良好的鉴别和校准性能。虽然存在性能优异的 CRC 风险预测模型,但仍然需要对性能指标及其临床实用性进行透明的报告。需要在这一领域开展进一步的研究,以促进这些模型与临床实践的结合,尤其是在 CRC 筛查方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Algorithms to Clinical Utility: A Systematic Review of Individualized Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer
Individualized risk prediction models for colorectal cancer (CRC) play a pivotal role in shaping risk-based screening approaches, garnering attention for use in informed decision making by patients and clinicians. While the incorporation of new predictors and the development of advanced yet complex prediction models can enhance model performance, their practical implementation in clinical settings remains challenging. This systematic review assessed individualized CRC risk prediction models for their validity and potential clinical utility. Utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration methods and PROBAST tool, we conducted comprehensive searches across key databases and risk of bias assessment, respectively. Out of 41 studies included evaluating 44 risk prediction models, 12 conventional and 3 composite models underwent external validation. All risk models exhibited varying discriminatory accuracy, with the area under the curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.57 to 0.90. However, most studies showed an unclear or high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability. Of the five models with promising clinical utility, only two underwent external validation and one employed a decision curve analysis. These models demonstrated a discriminating and well-calibrated performance. While high-performing CRC risk prediction models exist, a need for transparent reporting of performance metrics and their clinical utility persists. Further research on this area is needed to facilitate the integration of these models into clinical practice, particularly in CRC screening.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信