Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Development and validation of a risk score predicting risk of colorectal cancer

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Steffen, Annika
MacInnis, Robert J
Joshy, Grace
Giles, Graham G
Banks, Emily
Roder, David

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

American Association for Cancer Research

Abstract

Background: Quantifying the risk of colorectal cancer for individuals is likely to be useful for health service provision. Our aim was to develop and externally validate a prediction model to predict 5-year colorectal cancer risk. Methods: Weused proportional hazards regression to develop the model based on established personal and lifestyle colorectal cancer risk factors using data from 197,874 individuals from the 45 and Up Study, Australia. We subsequently validated the model using 24,233 participants from the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS). Results: Atotal of 1,103 and 224 cases of colorectal cancer were diagnosed in the development and validation sample, respectively. Our model, which includes age, sex, BMI, prevalent diabetes, ever having undergone colorectal cancer screening, smoking, and alcohol intake, exhibited a discriminatory accuracy of 0.73 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-0.75] and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.66-0.73) using the development and validation sample, respectively. Calibration was good for both study samples. Stratified models according to colorectal cancer screening history, that additionally included family history, showed discriminatory accuracies of 0.75 (0.73-0.76) and 0.70 (0.67-0.72) for unscreened and screened individuals of the development sample, respectively. In the validation sample, discrimination was 0.68 (0.64-0.73) and 0.72 (0.67-0.76), respectively. Conclusion: Our model exhibited adequate predictive performance that was maintained in the external population. Impact: The model may be useful to design more powerful cancer prevention trials. In the group of unscreened individuals, the model may be useful as a preselection tool for population-based screening programs.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

2037-12-31