Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25800242›Full record

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.

Aasma Shaukat, Timothy R Church, Ryan Shanley, Noah D Kauff, Michael J O'Brien, Glenn M Mills, Paul A Jordan, John A Allen, Adam Kim, Andrew D Feld and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT00102011 phase3completednot on this map

Colonoscopy Screening Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterRan2000 to 2026Enrolled4,952ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsannual screening, fecal occult blood test, screening colonoscopy, standard follow-up care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 · 2021
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Aasma ShaukatSection of Gastroenterology, VA Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Department of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. shaukat@umn.edu.
Timothy R ChurchDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Ryan ShanleyDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Noah D KauffOvarian Cancer Screening and Prevention, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Michael J O'BrienDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Glenn M MillsSection of Hematology and Oncology, Louisiana State University Health, Shreveport, Louisiana.
Paul A JordanDepartment of Medicine, Louisiana State University Health, Shreveport, Louisiana.
John A AllenDepartment of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. Minnesota Gastroenterology, PA, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Adam KimMinnesota Gastroenterology, PA, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Andrew D FeldDepartment of Gastroenterology, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Washington.
Ann Graham ZauberDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Sidney J WinawerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Nutrition Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USLouisiana State University in Shreveport · USUniversity of Minnesota · USYale University · USBoston University · USGroup Health Cooperative · USMinnesota Gastroenterology · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Women's CancerP30CA077598 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI Douglas Yee · 1998 to 2026
$100.4M
University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
SCREENING COLONOSCOPY FEASIBILITY TRIALR01CA079572 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI ZAUBER, ANN GRAHAM · 1999 to 2011
$9.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA077598NCI NIH HHS R01 CA079572
6 · The paper itself

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

ColonoscopyEarly Detection of CancerModels, StatisticalAdenomaAdultAgedCohort StudiesColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID25800242
PMCPMC4452431
OpenAlexW2021720018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.