Dataset Information

All-cause mortality versus cancer-specific mortality as outcome in cancer screening trials: A review and modeling study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

All-cause mortality has been suggested as an end-point in cancer screening trials in order to avoid biases in attributing the cause of death. The aim of this study was to investigate which sample size and follow-up is needed to find a significant reduction in all-cause mortality.

Methods

A literature review was conducted to identify previous studies that modeled the effect of screening on all-cause mortality. Microsimulation modeling was used to simulate breast cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancer screening trials. Model outputs were: cancer-specific deaths, all-cause deaths, and life-years gained per year of follow-up.

Results

There were large differences between the evaluated cancers. For lung cancer, when 40 000 high-risk people are randomized to each arm, a significant reduction in all-cause mortality could be expected between 11 and 13 years of follow-up. For breast cancer, a significant reduction could be found between 16 and 26 years of follow-up for a sample size of over 300 000 women in each arm. For colorectal cancer, 600 000 persons in each arm were required to be followed for 15-20 years. Our systematic literature review identified seven papers, which showed highly similar results to our estimates.

Conclusion

Cancer screening trials are able to demonstrate a significant reduction in all-cause mortality due to screening, but require very large sample sizes. Depending on the cancer, 40 000-600 000 participants per arm are needed to demonstrate a significant reduction. The reduction in all-cause mortality can only be detected between specific years of follow-up, more limited than the timeframe to detect a reduction in cancer-specific mortality.

SUBMITTER: Heijnsdijk EAM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6792501 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

All-cause mortality versus cancer-specific mortality as outcome in cancer screening trials: A review and modeling study.

Heijnsdijk Eveline A M EAM Csanádi Marcell M Gini Andrea A Ten Haaf Kevin K Bendes Rita R Anttila Ahti A Senore Carlo C de Koning Harry J HJ

Cancer medicine 20190818 13

<h4>Background</h4>All-cause mortality has been suggested as an end-point in cancer screening trials in order to avoid biases in attributing the cause of death. The aim of this study was to investigate which sample size and follow-up is needed to find a significant reduction in all-cause mortality.<h4>Methods</h4>A literature review was conducted to identify previous studies that modeled the effect of screening on all-cause mortality. Microsimulation modeling was used to simulate breast cancer, ...[more]

PMID: 31422585

Similar Datasets

Project description:Implicit and explicit use of expert knowledge to inform ecological analyses is becoming increasingly common because it often represents the sole source of information in many circumstances. Thus, there is a need to develop statistical methods that explicitly incorporate expert knowledge, and can successfully leverage this information while properly accounting for associated uncertainty during analysis. Studies of cause-specific mortality provide an example of implicit use of expert knowledge when causes-of-death are uncertain and assigned based on the observer's knowledge of the most likely cause. To explicitly incorporate this use of expert knowledge and the associated uncertainty, we developed a statistical model for estimating cause-specific mortality using a data augmentation approach within a Bayesian hierarchical framework. Specifically, for each mortality event, we elicited the observer's belief of cause-of-death by having them specify the probability that the death was due to each potential cause. These probabilities were then used as prior predictive values within our framework. This hierarchical framework permitted a simple and rigorous estimation method that was easily modified to include covariate effects and regularizing terms. Although applied to survival analysis, this method can be extended to any event-time analysis with multiple event types, for which there is uncertainty regarding the true outcome. We conducted simulations to determine how our framework compared to traditional approaches that use expert knowledge implicitly and assume that cause-of-death is specified accurately. Simulation results supported the inclusion of observer uncertainty in cause-of-death assignment in modeling of cause-specific mortality to improve model performance and inference. Finally, we applied the statistical model we developed and a traditional method to cause-specific survival data for white-tailed deer, and compared results. We demonstrate that model selection results changed between the two approaches, and incorporating observer knowledge in cause-of-death increased the variability associated with parameter estimates when compared to the traditional approach. These differences between the two approaches can impact reported results, and therefore, it is critical to explicitly incorporate expert knowledge in statistical methods to ensure rigorous inference.

Project description:ImportanceHealth outcomes from the Women's Health Initiative Estrogen Plus Progestin and Estrogen-Alone Trials have been reported, but previous publications have generally not focused on all-cause and cause-specific mortality.ObjectiveTo examine total and cause-specific cumulative mortality, including during the intervention and extended postintervention follow-up, of the 2 Women's Health Initiative hormone therapy trials.Design, setting, and participantsObservational follow-up of US multiethnic postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years enrolled in 2 randomized clinical trials between 1993 and 1998 and followed up through December 31, 2014.InterventionsConjugated equine estrogens (CEE, 0.625 mg/d) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA, 2.5 mg/d) (n = 8506) vs placebo (n = 8102) for 5.6 years (median) or CEE alone (n = 5310) vs placebo (n = 5429) for 7.2 years (median).Main outcomes and measuresAll-cause mortality (primary outcome) and cause-specific mortality (cardiovascular disease mortality, cancer mortality, and other major causes of mortality) in the 2 trials pooled and in each trial individually, with prespecified analyses by 10-year age group based on age at time of randomization.ResultsAmong 27 347 women who were randomized (baseline mean [SD] age, 63.4 [7.2] years; 80.6% white), mortality follow-up was available for more than 98%. During the cumulative 18-year follow-up, 7489 deaths occurred (1088 deaths during the intervention phase and 6401 deaths during postintervention follow-up). All-cause mortality was 27.1% in the hormone therapy group vs 27.6% in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.94-1.03]) in the overall pooled cohort; with CEE plus MPA, the HR was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.96-1.08); and with CEE alone, the HR was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.88-1.01). In the pooled cohort for cardiovascular mortality, the HR was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.92-1.08 [8.9 % with hormone therapy vs 9.0% with placebo]); for total cancer mortality, the HR was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.95-1.12 [8.2 % with hormone therapy vs 8.0% with placebo]); and for other causes, the HR was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.88-1.02 [10.0% with hormone therapy vs 10.7% with placebo]), and results did not differ significantly between trials. When examined by 10-year age groups comparing younger women (aged 50-59 years) to older women (aged 70-79 years) in the pooled cohort, the ratio of nominal HRs for all-cause mortality was 0.61 (95% CI, 0.43-0.87) during the intervention phase and the ratio was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76-1.00) during cumulative 18-year follow-up, without significant heterogeneity between trials.Conclusions and relevanceAmong postmenopausal women, hormone therapy with CEE plus MPA for a median of 5.6 years or with CEE alone for a median of 7.2 years was not associated with risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, or cancer mortality during a cumulative follow-up of 18 years.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000611.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess how often harm is quantified in randomised trials of cancer screening.DesignTwo authors independently extracted data on harms from randomised cancer screening trials. Binary outcomes were described as proportions and continuous outcomes with medians and interquartile ranges.Data sourcesFor cancer screening previously assessed in a Cochrane review, we identified trials from their reference lists and updated the search in CENTRAL. For cancer screening not assessed in a Cochrane review, we searched CENTRAL, Medline, and Embase.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised trials that assessed the efficacy of cancer screening for reducing incidence of cancer, cancer specific mortality, and/or all cause mortality.Data extractionTwo reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility. Two reviewers, who were blinded to the identity of the study's authors, assessed whether absolute numbers or incidence rates of outcomes related to harm were provided separately for the screening and control groups. The outcomes were false positive findings, overdiagnosis, negative psychosocial consequences, somatic complications, invasive follow-up procedures, all cause mortality, and withdrawals because of adverse events.ResultsOut of 4590 articles assessed, 198 (57 trials, 10 screening technologies) matched the inclusion criteria. False positive findings were quantified in two of 57 trials (4%, 95% confidence interval 0% to 12%), overdiagnosis in four (7%, 2% to 18%), negative psychosocial consequences in five (9%, 3% to 20%), somatic complications in 11 (19%, 10% to 32%), use of invasive follow-up procedures in 27 (47%, 34% to 61%), all cause mortality in 34 (60%, 46% to 72%), and withdrawals because of adverse effects in one trial (2%, 0% to 11%). The median percentage of space in the results section that reported harms was 12% (interquartile range 2-19%).ConclusionsCancer screening trials seldom quantify the harms of screening. Of the 57 cancer screening trials examined, the most important harms of screening--overdiagnosis and false positive findings--were quantified in only 7% and 4%, respectively.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough testicular cancer (TC) treatment has been associated with severe late morbidities, including second malignant neoplasms (SMNs) and ischemic heart disease (IHD), cause-specific excess mortality has been rarely studied among patients treated in the platinum era.MethodsIn a large, multicenter cohort including 6042 patients with TC treated between 1976 and 2006, cause-specific mortality was compared with general population mortality rates. Associations with treatment were assessed with proportional hazards analysis.ResultsWith a median follow-up of 17.6 years, 800 patients died; 40.3% of these patients died because of TC. The cumulative mortality was 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.5%-10.7%) 25 years after TC treatment. In comparison with general population mortality rates, patients with nonseminoma experienced 2.0 to 11.6 times elevated mortality from lung, stomach, pancreatic, rectal, and kidney cancers, soft-tissue sarcomas, and leukemia; 1.9-fold increased mortality (95% CI, 1.3-2.8) from IHD; and 3.9-fold increased mortality (95% CI, 1.5-8.4) from pneumonia. Seminoma patients experienced 2.5 to 4.6 times increased mortality from stomach, pancreatic, bladder cancer and leukemia. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy were associated with 2.1 (95% CI, 1.8-2.5) and 2.5 times higher SMN mortality (95% CI, 2.0-3.1), respectively, in comparison with the general population. In a multivariable analysis, patients treated with platinum-containing chemotherapy had a 2.5-fold increased hazard ratio (HR; 95% CI, 1.8-3.5) for SMN mortality in comparison with patients without platinum-containing chemotherapy. The HR for SMN mortality increased 0.29 (95% CI, 0.19-0.39) per 100 mg/m2 platinum dose administered (Ptrend < .001). IHD mortality was increased 2.1-fold (95% CI, 1.5-4.2) after platinum-containing chemotherapy in comparison with patients without platinum exposure.ConclusionsPlatinum-containing chemotherapy is associated with a dose-dependent increase in the risk of SMN mortality.

Dataset Information

All-cause mortality versus cancer-specific mortality as outcome in cancer screening trials: A review and modeling study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

All-cause mortality versus cancer-specific mortality as outcome in cancer screening trials: A review and modeling study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets