Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39779593›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2025

Modeling and the Use of Surrogate Endpoints: Is This a Valid Approach?

Uri Ladabaum, Luuk A van Duuren, Elizabeth E Half, Zohar Levi, Barbara Silverman, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Uri LadabaumSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, 430 Broadway Street Pavilion C, 3Rd Floor C-326, Redwood, CA, USA. uri.ladabaum@stanford.edu.
Luuk A van DuurenDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Elizabeth E HalfGastroenterololy Institute, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Zohar LeviDivision of Gastroenterology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel.
Barbara SilvermanThe Israeli Cancer Registry, Ministry of Health, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Iris Lansdorp-VogelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDevelopment of novel colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests is a dynamic field. Decision analytic modeling based on inputs derived from rigorous prospective studies informs CRC screening guidelines. Exploratory modeling may have a place in early phases of test development.

methodsWe explored whether (1) surrogate endpoints for long-term, programmatic effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness could be potentially informative in early stages of test development and (2) whether rapid exploratory modeling with a web-based tool would be feasible.

resultsFirst, based on comparisons with published estimates for reductions in CRC mortality with various screening tests in four established decision analytic models of CRC screening, the surrogate endpoint of the number needed to colonoscope to detect one CRC or advanced precancerous lesion (APL) in round 1 of screening appears to hold promise as a measure of clinical effectiveness. Similarly, based on comparisons with published estimates for cost/quality-adjusted life-year gained with screening in the four models, the surrogate endpoint of cost to detect one CRC or APL in round 1 of screening appears to hold promise as a measure of cost-effectiveness. Second, exploration of the impact of lowering the screening initiation age in Israel from age 50 to 45 with the web-based EU-TOPIA tool, compared with the results of a recently published comprehensive modeling study, suggests that exploratory modeling of programmatic screening may be feasible with relatively low time demand vs. that required for typical full-length modeling publications.

conclusionFurther validation in other models and with a broader set of test performance characteristics is prudent before surrogate endpoints or rapid modeling are incorporated into the novel test development process.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsDecision Support TechniquesEarly Detection of CancerColonoscopyCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsColorectal cancerCost-effectivenessDecision analysisModelingNovel testResearch and developmentScreeningSurrogate endpoint

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.