Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37721755›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Methods for Using Race and Ethnicity in Prediction Models for Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility.

Rebecca Landy, Isabel Gomez, Tanner J Caverly, Kensaku Kawamoto, M Patricia Rivera, Hilary A Robbins, Corey D Young, Anil K Chaturvedi, Li C Cheung, Hormuzd A Katki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Lung cancer screening: where do we stand?Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca LandyDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
Isabel GomezDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
Tanner J CaverlyDepartment of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor.
Kensaku KawamotoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
M Patricia RiveraDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and Wilmot Cancer Institute, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
Hilary A RobbinsGenomic Epidemiology Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Corey D YoungDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
Anil K ChaturvediDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
Li C CheungDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
Hormuzd A KatkiDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland.
National Cancer Institute · USCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer · FRNational Institutes of Health · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USUniversity of Rochester · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

Translating Molecular and Clinical Data to Population Lung Cancer Risk AssessmentU19CA203654 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI Christopher I. Amos · 2017 to 2026
$23.7M
Scalable decision support and shared decision making for lung cancer screeningR18HS026198 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI KAWAMOTO, KENSAKU · 2019 to 2021
$1.2M
Evaluating risk prediction models for use in lung cancer screening in diverse populations around the worldR03CA245979 · NCI · INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RES ON CANCER · PI ROBBINS, HILARY A. · 2020 to 2020
$112k
AHRQ HHS R18 HS026198NCI NIH HHS R03 CA245979NCI NIH HHS U19 CA203654World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Using race and ethnicity in clinical prediction models can reduce or inadvertently increase racial and ethnic disparities in medical decisions. Objective: To compare eligibility for lung cancer screening in a contemporary representative US population by refitting the life-years gained from screening-computed tomography (LYFS-CT) model to exclude race and ethnicity vs a counterfactual eligibility approach that recalculates life expectancy for racial and ethnic minority individuals using the same covariates but substitutes White race and uses the higher predicted life expectancy, ensuring that historically underserved groups are not penalized. Design, Setting, and Participants: The 2 submodels composing LYFS-CT NoRace were refit and externally validated without race and ethnicity: the lung cancer death submodel in participants of a large clinical trial (recruited 1993-2001; followed up until December 31, 2009) who ever smoked (n = 39 180) and the all-cause mortality submodel in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 1997-2001 participants aged 40 to 80 years who ever smoked (n = 74 842, followed up until December 31, 2006). Screening eligibility was examined in NHIS 2015-2018 participants aged 50 to 80 years who ever smoked. Data were analyzed from June 2021 to September 2022. Exposure: Including and removing race and ethnicity (African American, Asian American, Hispanic American, White) in each LYFS-CT submodel. Main Outcomes and Measures: By race and ethnicity: calibration of the LYFS-CT NoRace model and the counterfactual approach (ratio of expected to observed [E/O] outcomes), US individuals eligible for screening, predicted days of life gained from screening by LYFS-CT. Results: The NHIS 2015-2018 included 25 601 individuals aged 50 to 80 years who ever smoked (2769 African American, 649 Asian American, 1855 Hispanic American, and 20 328 White individuals). Removing race and ethnicity from the submodels underestimated lung cancer death risk (expected/observed [E/O], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.00) and all-cause mortality (E/O, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94) in African American individuals. It also overestimated mortality in Hispanic American (E/O, 1.08, 95% CI, 1.00-1.16) and Asian American individuals (E/O, 1.14, 95% CI, 1.01-1.30). Consequently, the LYFS-CT NoRace model increased Hispanic American and Asian American eligibility by 108% and 73%, respectively, while reducing African American eligibility by 39%. Using LYFS-CT with the counterfactual all-cause mortality model better maintained calibration across groups and increased African American eligibility by 13% without reducing eligibility for Hispanic American and Asian American individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, removing race and ethnicity miscalibrated LYFS-CT submodels and substantially reduced African American eligibility for lung cancer screening. Under counterfactual eligibility, no one became ineligible, and African American eligibility increased, demonstrating the potential for maintaining model accuracy while reducing disparities.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerEligibility DeterminationLung NeoplasmsMass ScreeningAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAsianBlack or African AmericanEthnicityHispanic or LatinoHumansLife ExpectancyMiddle AgedMinority GroupsModels, Statistical

Identifiers

PMID37721755
PMCPMC10507484
OpenAlexW4386818149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.