ArticleGastro hep advances2024
Development and External Validation of a Prediction Model for Colorectal Cancer Among Patients Awaiting Surveillance Colonoscopy Following Polypectomy.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-Enhanced Prognostic Model for Predicting Polyp Recurrence and Guiding Post-Polypectomy Surveillance Intervals Using the ERCPMP-V5 Dataset.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Surveillance of colorectal neoplasia: a review of guidelines, current evidence, and future directions.Colorectal cancer · 2025Article
- Personalized surveillance in colorectal cancer: Integrating circulating tumor DNA and artificial intelligence into post-treatment follow-up.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Decline in a Colonoscopist's Adenoma Detection Rate After First Cataract Surgery With Restoration After Second Cataract Surgery.Gastro hep advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Demand for surveillance colonoscopy can sometimes exceed capacity, such as during and following the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, yet no tools exist to prioritize the patients most likely to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) among those awaiting surveillance colonoscopy. We developed a multivariable prediction model for CRC at surveillance comparing performance to a model that assigned patients as low or high risk based solely on polyp characteristics (guideline-based model). Methods: Logistic regression was used for model development among patients receiving surveillance colonoscopy in 2014-2019. Candidate predictors included index colonoscopy indication, findings, and endoscopist adenoma detection rate, and patient and clinical characteristics at surveillance. Patients were randomly divided into model development (n = 36,994) and internal validation cohorts (n = 15,854). External validation was performed on 30,015 patients receiving surveillance colonoscopy in 2020-2022, and the multivariable model was then updated and retested. Results: One hundred fourteen, 43, and 71 CRCs were detected at surveillance in the 3 cohorts, respectively. Polyp size ≥10 mm, adenoma detection rate <32.5% or missing, patient age, and ever smoked tobacco were significant CRC predictors; this multivariable model outperformed the guideline-based model (internal validation cohort area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.81 vs 0.52, 95% CI: 0.45-0.60). Performance declined at external validation but recovered with model updating (operating characteristic curve: 0.72 95% CI: 0.66-0.77). Conclusion: When surveillance colonoscopy demand exceeds capacity, a prediction model featuring common clinical predictors may help prioritize patients at highest risk for CRC among those awaiting surveillance. Also, regular model updates can address model performance drift.
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.