Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Mayo Lung Project (MLP), a randomized controlled clinical trial of lung cancer screening conducted between 1971 and 1986 among male smokers aged 45 or above, demonstrated an increase in lung cancer survival since the time of diag...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Berman Barbara, McCarthy William J, Tian Haijun, Shi Lu, Wu Shinyi, Boer Rob
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2011-03-01
Series:BMC Cancer
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/11/92
id doaj-1d7e12711eb74561a46dcc316225afe6
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1d7e12711eb74561a46dcc316225afe62020-11-25T01:32:31ZengBMCBMC Cancer1471-24072011-03-011119210.1186/1471-2407-11-92Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung projectBerman BarbaraMcCarthy William JTian HaijunShi LuWu ShinyiBoer Rob<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Mayo Lung Project (MLP), a randomized controlled clinical trial of lung cancer screening conducted between 1971 and 1986 among male smokers aged 45 or above, demonstrated an increase in lung cancer survival since the time of diagnosis, but no reduction in lung cancer mortality. Whether this result necessarily indicates a lack of mortality benefit for screening remains controversial. A number of hypotheses have been proposed to explain the observed outcome, including over-diagnosis, screening sensitivity, and population heterogeneity (initial difference in lung cancer risks between the two trial arms). This study is intended to provide model-based testing for some of these important arguments.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Using a micro-simulation model, the MISCAN-lung model, we explore the possible influence of screening sensitivity, systematic error, over-diagnosis and population heterogeneity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Calibrating screening sensitivity, systematic error, or over-diagnosis does not noticeably improve the fit of the model, whereas calibrating population heterogeneity helps the model predict lung cancer incidence better.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our conclusion is that the hypothesized imperfection in screening sensitivity, systematic error, and over-diagnosis do not in themselves explain the observed trial results. Model fit improvement achieved by accounting for population heterogeneity suggests a higher risk of cancer incidence in the intervention group as compared with the control group.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/11/92
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Berman Barbara
McCarthy William J
Tian Haijun
Shi Lu
Wu Shinyi
Boer Rob
spellingShingle Berman Barbara
McCarthy William J
Tian Haijun
Shi Lu
Wu Shinyi
Boer Rob
Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
BMC Cancer
author_facet Berman Barbara
McCarthy William J
Tian Haijun
Shi Lu
Wu Shinyi
Boer Rob
author_sort Berman Barbara
title Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
title_short Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
title_full Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
title_fullStr Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
title_full_unstemmed Exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
title_sort exploring the uncertainties of early detection results: model-based interpretation of mayo lung project
publisher BMC
series BMC Cancer
issn 1471-2407
publishDate 2011-03-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Mayo Lung Project (MLP), a randomized controlled clinical trial of lung cancer screening conducted between 1971 and 1986 among male smokers aged 45 or above, demonstrated an increase in lung cancer survival since the time of diagnosis, but no reduction in lung cancer mortality. Whether this result necessarily indicates a lack of mortality benefit for screening remains controversial. A number of hypotheses have been proposed to explain the observed outcome, including over-diagnosis, screening sensitivity, and population heterogeneity (initial difference in lung cancer risks between the two trial arms). This study is intended to provide model-based testing for some of these important arguments.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Using a micro-simulation model, the MISCAN-lung model, we explore the possible influence of screening sensitivity, systematic error, over-diagnosis and population heterogeneity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Calibrating screening sensitivity, systematic error, or over-diagnosis does not noticeably improve the fit of the model, whereas calibrating population heterogeneity helps the model predict lung cancer incidence better.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our conclusion is that the hypothesized imperfection in screening sensitivity, systematic error, and over-diagnosis do not in themselves explain the observed trial results. Model fit improvement achieved by accounting for population heterogeneity suggests a higher risk of cancer incidence in the intervention group as compared with the control group.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/11/92
work_keys_str_mv AT bermanbarbara exploringtheuncertaintiesofearlydetectionresultsmodelbasedinterpretationofmayolungproject
AT mccarthywilliamj exploringtheuncertaintiesofearlydetectionresultsmodelbasedinterpretationofmayolungproject
AT tianhaijun exploringtheuncertaintiesofearlydetectionresultsmodelbasedinterpretationofmayolungproject
AT shilu exploringtheuncertaintiesofearlydetectionresultsmodelbasedinterpretationofmayolungproject
AT wushinyi exploringtheuncertaintiesofearlydetectionresultsmodelbasedinterpretationofmayolungproject
AT boerrob exploringtheuncertaintiesofearlydetectionresultsmodelbasedinterpretationofmayolungproject
_version_ 1725081561800376320