Trial reportCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2015
Development and validation of a clinical score for predicting risk of adenoma at screening colonoscopy.
Trial report in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00102011 (Colonoscopy Screening Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Colonoscopy Screening Trial
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomized Trial of Facilitated Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy vs Sequential Fecal-Based Blood Test.Gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Endoscopic characterization and development of a prediction model for colorectal adenomatous polyps.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Article
- Establish a Novel Model for Predicting the Risk of Colorectal Ademomatous Polyps: a Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of Cancer · 2022Article
- Black and White Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Outcomes: A Narrative Review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Review
- Optimizing Screening Colonoscopy: Strategies and Alternatives.Visceral medicine · 2019Review
- Outcomes of screening and surveillance in people with two parents affected by colorectal cancers: experiences from the Familial Bowel Cancer Service.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2019Article
- Strongly enhanced colorectal cancer risk stratification by combining family history and genetic risk score.Clinical epidemiology · 2018Article
- Risk Model for Colorectal Cancer in Spanish Population Using Environmental and Genetic Factors: Results from the MCC-Spain study.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, no clinical tools use demographic and risk factor information to predict the risk of finding an adenoma in individuals undergoing colon cancer screening. Such a tool would be valuable for identifying those who would most benefit from screening colonoscopy.
methodsWe used baseline data from men and women who underwent screening colonoscopy from the randomized, multicenter National Colonoscopy Study (NCS) to develop and validate an adenoma risk model. The study, conducted at three sites in the United States (Minneapolis, MN; Seattle, WA; and Shreveport, LA) asked all participants to complete baseline questionnaires on clinical risk factors and family history. Model parameters estimated from logistic regression yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC) used to assess prediction.
resultsFive hundred forty-one subjects were included in the development model, and 1,334 in the validation of the risk score. Variables in the prediction of adenoma risk for colonoscopy screening were age (likelihood ratio test for overall contribution to model, P < 0.001), male sex (P < 0.001), body mass index (P < 0.001), family history of at least one first-degree relative with colorectal cancer (P = 0.036), and smoking history (P < 0.001). The adjusted AUROCC of 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61-0.74] for the derivation cohort was not statistically significantly different from that in the validation cohort. The adjusted AUROCC for the entire cohort was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60-0.67).
conclusionWe developed and validated a simple well-calibrated risk score. IMPACT: This tool may be useful for estimating risk of adenomas in screening eligible men and women.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.