» Articles » PMID: 21406620

How Does Early Detection by Screening Affect Disease Progression? Modeling Estimated Benefits in Prostate Cancer Screening

Overview
Publisher Sage Publications
Date 2011 Mar 17
PMID 21406620
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Simulation models are essential tools for estimating benefits of cancer screening programs. Such models include a screening-effect model that represents how early detection by screening followed by treatment affects disease-specific survival. Two commonly used screening-effect models are the stage-shift model, where mortality benefits are explained by the shift to more favorable stages, and the cure model, where early detection enhances the chances of cure from disease.

Objective: This article describes commonly used screening-effect models and analyses their predicted mortality benefit in a model for prostate cancer screening.

Method: The MISCAN simulation model was used to predict the reduction of prostate cancer mortality in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) Rotterdam. The screening-effect models were included in the model. For each model the predictions of prostate cancer mortality reduction were calculated. The study compared 4 screening-effect models, which are versions of the stage-shift model or the cure model.

Results: The stage-shift models predicted, after a follow-up of 9 years, reductions in prostate cancer mortality varying from 38% to 63% for ERSPC-Rotterdam compared with a 27% reduction observed in the ERSPC. The cure models predicted reductions in prostate cancer mortality varying from 21% to 27%.

Conclusions: The differences in predicted mortality reductions show the importance of validating models to observed trial mortality data. The stage-shift models considerably overestimated the mortality reduction. Therefore, the stage-shift models should be used with care, especially when modeling the effect of screening for cancers with long lead times, such as prostate cancer.

Citing Articles

Strong association between reduction of late-stage cancers and reduction of cancer-specific mortality in meta-regression of randomized screening trials across multiple cancer types.

Dai J, Georg Luebeck E, Chang E, Clarke C, Hubbell E, Zhang N J Med Screen. 2024; 31(4):211-222.

PMID: 38797981 PMC: 11528850. DOI: 10.1177/09691413241256744.


Clinical performance and utility: A microsimulation model to inform the design of screening trials for a multi-cancer early detection test.

Dai J, Zhang J, Braun J, Simon N, Hubbell E, Zhang N J Med Screen. 2024; 31(3):140-149.

PMID: 38304990 PMC: 11330083. DOI: 10.1177/09691413241228041.


Dying To Find Out: The Cost of Time at the Dawn of the Multicancer Early Detection Era.

Klein E, Madhavan S, Beer T, Bettegowda C, Liu M, Hartman A Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2023; 32(8):1003-1010.

PMID: 37255363 PMC: 10390858. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-1275.


Modelled mortality benefits of multi-cancer early detection screening in England.

Sasieni P, Smittenaar R, Hubbell E, Broggio J, Neal R, Swanton C Br J Cancer. 2023; 129(1):72-80.

PMID: 37185463 PMC: 10307803. DOI: 10.1038/s41416-023-02243-9.


Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prostate Cancer Screening in the UK: A Decision Model Analysis Based on the CAP Trial.

Keeney E, Sanghera S, Martin R, Gulati R, Wiklund F, Walsh E Pharmacoeconomics. 2022; 40(12):1207-1220.

PMID: 36201131 PMC: 9674711. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01191-1.


References
1.
Plevritis S, Sigal B, Salzman P, Rosenberg J, Glynn P . A stochastic simulation model of U.S. breast cancer mortality trends from 1975 to 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006; (36):86-95. DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj012. View

2.
Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, Mariotto A, Szabo A, Falcon S, Wegelin J . Quantifying the role of PSA screening in the US prostate cancer mortality decline. Cancer Causes Control. 2007; 19(2):175-81. PMC: 3064270. DOI: 10.1007/s10552-007-9083-8. View

3.
Frazier A, Colditz G, Fuchs C, Kuntz K . Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population. JAMA. 2000; 284(15):1954-61. DOI: 10.1001/jama.284.15.1954. View

4.
Smith R, Cokkinides V, Brooks D, Saslow D, Brawley O . Cancer screening in the United States, 2010: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010; 60(2):99-119. DOI: 10.3322/caac.20063. View

5.
de Gelder R, Bulliard J, de Wolf C, Fracheboud J, Draisma G, Schopper D . Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic versus organised mammography screening in Switzerland. Eur J Cancer. 2008; 45(1):127-38. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.09.015. View