Observational studyCancer2016
Predicting advanced neoplasia at colonoscopy in a diverse population with the National Cancer Institute colorectal cancer risk-assessment tool.
Observational study in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Scores for Predicting Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in the Average-risk Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Exploring a novel method for optimising the implementation of a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool into primary care: a qualitative study.Implementation science : IS · 2022Trial
- Gender Effects on the Impact of Colorectal Cancer Risk Calculators on Screening Intentions: Experimental Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Precision Approaches to Screening: Brave New World or Worlds Apart?Gastroenterology · 2023Review
- A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2022Article
- Article
- Sessile serrated lesion detection rates during average risk screening colonoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature.Endoscopy international open · 2021Review
- Risk prediction rule for advanced neoplasia on screening colonoscopy for average-risk individuals.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Advanced neoplasia in Veterans at screening colonoscopy using the National Cancer Institute Risk Assessment Tool.BMC cancer · 2019Article
- Colorectal cancer screening: An updated review of the available options.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTailoring screening to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk could improve screening effectiveness. Most CRCs arise from advanced neoplasia (AN) that dwells for years. To date, no available colorectal neoplasia risk score has been validated externally in a diverse population. The authors explored whether the National Cancer Institute (NCI) CRC risk-assessment tool, which was developed to predict future CRC risk, could predict current AN prevalence in a diverse population, thereby allowing its use in risk stratification for screening.
methodsThis was a prospective examination of the relation between predicted 10-year CRC risk and the prevalence of AN, defined as advanced or multiple (≥3 adenomatous, ≥5 serrated) adenomatous or sessile serrated polyps, in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy.
resultsAmong 509 screenees (50% women; median age, 58 years; 61% white, 5% black, 10% Hispanic, and 24% Asian), 58 (11%) had AN. The prevalence of AN increased progressively from 6% in the lowest risk-score quintile to 17% in the highest risk-score quintile (P = .002). Risk-score distributions in individuals with versus without AN differed significantly (median, 1.38 [0.90-1.87] vs 1.02 [0.62-1.57], respectively; P = .003), with substantial overlap. The discriminatory accuracy of the tool was modest, with areas under the curve of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.69) overall, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.49-0.70) for women, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.53-0.73) for men. The results did not change substantively when the analysis was restricted to adenomatous lesions or to screening procedures without any additional incidental indication.
conclusionsThe NCI CRC risk-assessment tool displays modest discriminatory accuracy in predicting AN at screening colonoscopy in a diverse population. This tool may aid shared decision-making in clinical practice. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2663-2670. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
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.