Common Model Inputs Used in CISNET Collaborative Breast Cancer Modeling

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 38, Issue 1_suppl, 2018, Pages 9S-23S

  Mandelblatt, Jeanne S ^a   Near, Aimee M ^a   Miglioretti, Diana L ^b,c,d   Munoz, Diego ^e   Sprague, Brian L ^f   Trentham Dietz, Amy ^g   Gangnon, Ronald ^g   Kurian, Allison W ^e   Weedon Fekjaer, Harald ^h   Cronin, Kathleen A ⁱ   Plevritis, Sylvia K ^e  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c GROUP HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^e STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^h OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

ⁱ NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer epidemiology; cancer simulation; simulation models

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; POPULATION RESEARCH; PROCEDURES; PUBLIC RELATIONS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURVIVAL; UNITED STATES; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CENSUSES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INTERPROFESSIONAL RELATIONS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SURVIVAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85040578878     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17700624     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Weigel AP, Liniger MA, Appenzeller C. Can multi-model combination really enhance the prediction skill of probabilistic ensemble forecasts?Q J Royal Meteorol Soc. 2008;134:241–60.
2. Alagoz O, Ergun MA, Cevik M. The University Of Wisconsin breast cancer epidemiology simulation model: An update. Med Decis Makin. 2018;38(1S):99–111.
3. Schechter CB, Near AM, Jayasekera J, Chang Y, Mandelblatt JS. Structure, function, and applications of the Georgetown-Einstein (GE) breast cancer simulation model. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):66–77.
4. Huang X, Li Y, Song J, Berry D. A Bayesian simulation model for breast cancer screening, incidence, treatment, and mortality. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):78–88.
5. Munoz D, Plevritis SK. Estimating breast cancer survival by molecular subtype in the absence of screening and adjuvant treatment. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):32–43.
6. Lee SJ, Li X, Huang H, Zelen M. The Dana-Farber CISNET model for breast cancer screening strategies: An update. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):44–53.
7. van den Broek JJ, van Ravesteyn NT, Heijnsdijk EA, de Koning H. Simulating the impact of risk-based screening and treatment on breast cancer outcomes with MISCAN-Fadia. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(1S):54–65.
8. Clarke LD, Plevritis SK, Boer R, Cronin KA, Feuer EJ. A comparative review of CISNET breast models used to analyze U.S. breast cancer incidence and mortality trends. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;96–105.
9. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program SEER*Stat Database: Incidence - SEER 9 Regs Research Data, Nov2015 Sub (1973-2013) -Linked To County Attributes - Total U.S., 1969-2014 Counties, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Surveillance Systems Branch, released April 2016, based on the November 2015 submission. Available from: URL: www.seer.cancer.gov.
10. Habbema JD, Wilt TJ, Etzioni R. Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161:812–8.
11. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). 2016. Available from: URL: http://breastscreening.cancer.gov/
12. 2001 Regional Database, Woods & Poole Economics Inc., Copyright January 2001; estimated July 1 population by race, sex and single year and 5-year age groups based on 1990 Census and post-censal Census Bureau estimates.
13. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Populations-Total U.S. (1969-2011) Linked To Country Attributes-Total U.S., 1969-2011 Countries, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Surveillance Systems Branch, released October 2012. Available from: URL: www.seer.cancer.gov.
14. Clemmesen J. Carcinoma of the breast; results from statistical research. Br J Radiol. 1948;21:583–90.
15. Tretli S, Haldorsen T. A cohort analysis of breast cancer, uterine corpus cancer, and childbearing pattern in Norwegian women. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1990;44:215–9.
16. Weedon-Fekjaer H, Bakken K, Vatten LJ, Tretli S. Understanding recent trends in incidence of invasive breast cancer in Norway: age-period-cohort analysis based on registry data on mammography screening and hormone treatment use. BMJ. 2012;344:e299.
17. Rosenberg PS, Anderson WF. Age-period-cohort models in cancer surveillance research: ready for prime time?Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011;20:1263–8.
18. Clayton D, Schifflers E. Models for temporal variation in cancer rates. I: Age-period and age-cohort models. Stat Med. 1987;6:449–67.
19. Clayton D, Schifflers E. Models for temporal variation in cancer rates. II: Age-period-cohort models. Stat Med. 1987;6:469–81.
20. Holford TR. The estimation of age, period and cohort effects for vital rates. Biometrics. 1983;39:311–24.
21. Holford TR, Cronin KA, Mariotto AB, Feuer EJ. Changing patterns in breast cancer incidence trends. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;1925.
22. Cronin KA, Ravdin PM, Edwards BK. Sustained lower rates of breast cancer in the United States. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117:223–4.
23. Gangnon RE, Sprague BL, Stout NK. The contribution of mammography screening to breast cancer incidence trends in the United States: an updated age-period-cohort model. Can Epi Biomarkers Prev. 2015;24:905–12.
24. Mandelblatt JS, Cronin K, de Koning H, Miglioretti DL, Schechter CS, Stout N. Collaborative modeling of U.S. breast cancer screening strategies. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Publication No. 14-05201-EF-4, December2015. Available from: URL: http://www.uspreventiveservicetaskforce.org/Home/GetFile/1/16255/collabmodelingbc/pdf. [Accessed May 2016].
25. Mandelblatt JS, Stout NK, Schechter CB. Collaborative Modeling of the Benefits and Harms Associated With Different U.S. Breast Cancer Screening Strategies. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:215–25.
26. Munoz D, Near AM, van Ravesteyn NT. Effects of screening and systemic adjuvant therapy on er-specific US breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106.
27. Moller B, Fekjaer H, Hakulinen T. Prediction of cancer incidence in the Nordic countries: empirical comparison of different approaches. Stat Med. 2003;22:2751–66.
28. Munsell MF, Sprague BL, Berry DA, Chisholm G, Trentham-Dietz A. Body mass index and breast cancer risk according to postmenopausal estrogen-progestin use and hormone receptor status. Epidemiol Rev. 2014;36:114–36.
29. Sprague BL, Trentham-Dietz A, Cronin KA. A sustained decline in postmenopausal hormone use: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999-2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:595–603.
30. Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Burt V. Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106.
31. Trentham-Dietz A, Sprague BL, Hampton JM. Modification of breast cancer risk according to age and menopausal status: a combined analysis of five population-based case-control studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;145:165–75.
32. Jewett PI, Gangnon RE, Trentham-Dietz A, Sprague BL. Trends of postmenopausal estrogen plus progestin prevalence in the United States between 1970 and 2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124:727–33.
33. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Data. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2009. Available from: URL:www/cdc/gov/nchs/nhanes.htm. [Accessed May 2012].
34. Chang Y, Schechter CB, van Ravesteyn NT. Collaborative modeling of the impact of obesity on race-specific breast cancer incidence and mortality. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;136:823–35.
35. van Ravesteyn NT, Schechter CB, Near AM. Race-specific impact of natural history, mammography screening, and adjuvant treatment on breast cancer mortality rates in the United States. Can Epi Biomarkers Prev. 2011;20:112–22.
36. Mandelblatt J, Cronin K, Bailey S. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Inten Med. 2009;151:738–47.
37. American College of Radiology. American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems Atlas (BI-RADS Atlas). 4th ed. Restion, VA: American College Radiology. 2003.
38. American College of Radiology. American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems Atlas (BI-RADS Atlas).5th ed. Reston, VA; American College of Radiology. 2013.
39. Cronin KA, Mariotto AB, Clarke LD, Feuer EJ. Additional common inputs for analyzing impact of adjuvant therapy and mammography on U.S. mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;26–9.
40. Cronin KA, Yu B, Krapcho M. Modeling the dissemination of mammography in the United States. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:701–12.
41. National Center for Health Statistics, National Health Interview Survey. Available from: URL: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm. [Accessed May 2016].
42. Yankaskas BC, Haneuse S, Kapp JM, Kerlikowske K, Geller B, Buist DS. Performance of first mammography examination in women younger than 40 years. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:692–701.
43. US Food and Drug Administration. June2013. Silver Spring, Maryland. US Department of Health and Human Services. Available from: URL: http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/default.htm. [Accessed January 2015].
44. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual. 6th edition. Lippincott Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, PA; 2002.
45. Mariotto AB, Feuer EJ, Harlan LC, Abrams J. Dissemination of adjuvant multiagent chemotherapy and tamoxifen for breast cancer in the United States using estrogen receptor information: 1975-1999. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;7–15.
46. Mariotto A, Feuer EJ, Harlan LC, Wun LM, Johnson KA, Abrams J. Trends in use of adjuvant multi-agent chemotherapy and tamoxifen for breast cancer in the United States: 1975-1999. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1626–34.
47. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology - Breast Cancer. Available from: URL: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp. [Accessed May 2014].
48. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Ten Years of Hormone Therapy Reduces Breast Cancer Recurrence Without Compromising Quality of Life. June 2016. Available from: URL: https://www.asco.org/about-asco/press-center/news-released/ten-years-hormone-therapy-reduces-breast-cancer-recurrence. [Accessed June 2016].
49. Peto R, Davies C, Godwin J. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet. 2012;379:432–44.
50. Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:783–92.
51. Munoz D, Plevritis S. Estimating breast cancer progression features and survival by molecular subtype in the absence of screening and treatment. Med Decis Making. 2017; submitted
52. Gagnon RE, Stout NK, Alagoz O, Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Trentham-Dietz A. Contribution of breast cancer to overall mortality for U.S. women by age, cohort, race and body mass index. Med Decis Making. 2016; submitted.
53. Rosenberg MA. Competing risks to breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;15–9.