基于人工智能的计算机辅助息肉检测在结直肠癌筛查中的益处、负担和危害:微模拟模型研究。

IF 10
BMJ medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-27 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjmed-2025-001446
Natalie Halvorsen, Cesare Hassan, Loredana Correale, Nastazja Pilonis, Lise M Helsingen, Marco Spadaccini, Alessandro Repici, Farid Foroutan, Per Olav Vandvik, Shanaz Sultan, Magnus Løberg, Mette Kalager, Yuichi Mori, Michael Bretthauer
{"title":"基于人工智能的计算机辅助息肉检测在结直肠癌筛查中的益处、负担和危害:微模拟模型研究。","authors":"Natalie Halvorsen, Cesare Hassan, Loredana Correale, Nastazja Pilonis, Lise M Helsingen, Marco Spadaccini, Alessandro Repici, Farid Foroutan, Per Olav Vandvik, Shanaz Sultan, Magnus Løberg, Mette Kalager, Yuichi Mori, Michael Bretthauer","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2025-001446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong></p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To estimate the benefits, burden, and harms of implementing computer aided detection (CADe) of polyps in colonoscopy of population based screening programmes for colorectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Microsimulation modelling study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Cost effectiveness working package in the OperA (optimising colorectal cancer prevention through personalised treatment with artificial intelligence) project. A parallel guideline committee panel (BMJ Rapid recommendation) was consulted in defining the screening interventions and selection of outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Population: </strong>Four cohorts of 100 000 European individuals aged 60-69 years.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>The intervention was one screening of colonoscopy and a screening of colonoscopy after faecal immunochemical test every other year with CADe. The comparison group had the same screening every other year without CADe.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Benefits (colorectal cancer incidence and death), burden (surveillance colonoscopies), and harms (colonoscopy related adverse events) over 10 years were measured. The certainty in each outcome was assessed by use of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For 100 000 individuals participating in colonoscopy screening, 824 (0.82%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer within 10 years without CADe versus 713 (0.71%) with CADe (risk difference -0.11% (95% CI -0.43% to 0.21%)). For faecal immunochemical test screening colonoscopy, the risk was 5.82% (n=5820) without CADe versus 5.77% (n=5770) with CADe (difference -0.05% (-0.33% to 0.15%)). The risk of surveillance colonoscopy increased from 26.45% (n=26 453) to 32.82% (n=32 819) (difference 6.37% (5.8% to 6.9%)) for colonoscopy screening and from 52.26% (n=52 263) to 53.08% (n=53 082) (difference 0.82% (0.38% to 1.26%)) for faecal immunochemical test screening colonoscopy. No significant differences were noted in adverse events related to the colonoscopy between CADe and no CADe. The model estimates were sensitive to the assumed effects of screening on colorectal cancer risk and of CADe on adenoma detection rates. All outcomes were graded as low certainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With low certainty of evidence, adoption of CADe in population based screening provides small and uncertain clinical meaningful benefit, no incremental harms, and increased surveillance burden after screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"4 1","pages":"e001446"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11955961/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefits, burden, and harms of computer aided polyp detection with artificial intelligence in colorectal cancer screening: microsimulation modelling study.\",\"authors\":\"Natalie Halvorsen, Cesare Hassan, Loredana Correale, Nastazja Pilonis, Lise M Helsingen, Marco Spadaccini, Alessandro Repici, Farid Foroutan, Per Olav Vandvik, Shanaz Sultan, Magnus Løberg, Mette Kalager, Yuichi Mori, Michael Bretthauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjmed-2025-001446\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong></p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To estimate the benefits, burden, and harms of implementing computer aided detection (CADe) of polyps in colonoscopy of population based screening programmes for colorectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Microsimulation modelling study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Cost effectiveness working package in the OperA (optimising colorectal cancer prevention through personalised treatment with artificial intelligence) project. A parallel guideline committee panel (BMJ Rapid recommendation) was consulted in defining the screening interventions and selection of outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Population: </strong>Four cohorts of 100 000 European individuals aged 60-69 years.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>The intervention was one screening of colonoscopy and a screening of colonoscopy after faecal immunochemical test every other year with CADe. The comparison group had the same screening every other year without CADe.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Benefits (colorectal cancer incidence and death), burden (surveillance colonoscopies), and harms (colonoscopy related adverse events) over 10 years were measured. The certainty in each outcome was assessed by use of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For 100 000 individuals participating in colonoscopy screening, 824 (0.82%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer within 10 years without CADe versus 713 (0.71%) with CADe (risk difference -0.11% (95% CI -0.43% to 0.21%)). For faecal immunochemical test screening colonoscopy, the risk was 5.82% (n=5820) without CADe versus 5.77% (n=5770) with CADe (difference -0.05% (-0.33% to 0.15%)). The risk of surveillance colonoscopy increased from 26.45% (n=26 453) to 32.82% (n=32 819) (difference 6.37% (5.8% to 6.9%)) for colonoscopy screening and from 52.26% (n=52 263) to 53.08% (n=53 082) (difference 0.82% (0.38% to 1.26%)) for faecal immunochemical test screening colonoscopy. No significant differences were noted in adverse events related to the colonoscopy between CADe and no CADe. The model estimates were sensitive to the assumed effects of screening on colorectal cancer risk and of CADe on adenoma detection rates. All outcomes were graded as low certainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With low certainty of evidence, adoption of CADe in population based screening provides small and uncertain clinical meaningful benefit, no incremental harms, and increased surveillance burden after screening.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ medicine\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"e001446\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11955961/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2025-001446\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2025-001446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:目的:评估基于人群的结直肠癌筛查项目结肠镜检查中实施计算机辅助息肉检测(CADe)的益处、负担和危害。设计:微观模拟建模研究。情境:OperA(通过人工智能个性化治疗优化结直肠癌预防)项目的成本效益工作包。在确定筛查干预措施和选择结果措施时,咨询了平行的指南委员会小组(BMJ快速推荐)。人口:四组100,000名年龄在60-69岁之间的欧洲人。干预:干预是每隔一年用CADe进行一次粪便免疫化学试验后的结肠镜筛查和结肠镜筛查。对照组每隔一年进行同样的筛查,但没有CADe。主要结果测量:10年的获益(结直肠癌发病率和死亡)、负担(监测结肠镜检查)和危害(结肠镜检查相关不良事件)被测量。每个结果的确定性通过使用GRADE(建议评估、发展和评价分级)方法进行评估。结果:在10万名参加结肠镜筛查的个体中,824人(0.82%)在10年内被诊断为未行CADe的结直肠癌,而713人(0.71%)行CADe(风险差异-0.11% (95% CI -0.43%至0.21%))。对于粪便免疫化学试验筛查结肠镜检查,无CADe的风险为5.82% (n=5820),而有CADe的风险为5.77% (n=5770)(差异为-0.05%(-0.33%至0.15%))。结肠镜筛查的监测结肠镜风险从26.45% (n=26 453)增加到32.82% (n=32 819)(差异6.37%(5.8% ~ 6.9%)),粪便免疫化学试验筛查结肠镜风险从52.26% (n=52 263)增加到53.08% (n=53 082)(差异0.82%(0.38% ~ 1.26%))。与结肠镜检查相关的不良事件在CADe和未CADe组之间没有显著差异。模型估计对假设的筛查对结直肠癌风险的影响和CADe对腺瘤检出率的影响很敏感。所有结果均被评为低确定性。结论:在证据确定性较低的情况下,在基于人群的筛查中采用CADe提供的临床意义获益较小且不确定,没有增加的危害,并且增加了筛查后的监测负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Benefits, burden, and harms of computer aided polyp detection with artificial intelligence in colorectal cancer screening: microsimulation modelling study.

Abstract:

Objective: To estimate the benefits, burden, and harms of implementing computer aided detection (CADe) of polyps in colonoscopy of population based screening programmes for colorectal cancer.

Design: Microsimulation modelling study.

Setting: Cost effectiveness working package in the OperA (optimising colorectal cancer prevention through personalised treatment with artificial intelligence) project. A parallel guideline committee panel (BMJ Rapid recommendation) was consulted in defining the screening interventions and selection of outcome measures.

Population: Four cohorts of 100 000 European individuals aged 60-69 years.

Intervention: The intervention was one screening of colonoscopy and a screening of colonoscopy after faecal immunochemical test every other year with CADe. The comparison group had the same screening every other year without CADe.

Main outcome measures: Benefits (colorectal cancer incidence and death), burden (surveillance colonoscopies), and harms (colonoscopy related adverse events) over 10 years were measured. The certainty in each outcome was assessed by use of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach.

Results: For 100 000 individuals participating in colonoscopy screening, 824 (0.82%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer within 10 years without CADe versus 713 (0.71%) with CADe (risk difference -0.11% (95% CI -0.43% to 0.21%)). For faecal immunochemical test screening colonoscopy, the risk was 5.82% (n=5820) without CADe versus 5.77% (n=5770) with CADe (difference -0.05% (-0.33% to 0.15%)). The risk of surveillance colonoscopy increased from 26.45% (n=26 453) to 32.82% (n=32 819) (difference 6.37% (5.8% to 6.9%)) for colonoscopy screening and from 52.26% (n=52 263) to 53.08% (n=53 082) (difference 0.82% (0.38% to 1.26%)) for faecal immunochemical test screening colonoscopy. No significant differences were noted in adverse events related to the colonoscopy between CADe and no CADe. The model estimates were sensitive to the assumed effects of screening on colorectal cancer risk and of CADe on adenoma detection rates. All outcomes were graded as low certainty.

Conclusion: With low certainty of evidence, adoption of CADe in population based screening provides small and uncertain clinical meaningful benefit, no incremental harms, and increased surveillance burden after 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信