IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/hcarem/v15y2012i4p293-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulation optimization of PSA-threshold based prostate cancer screening policies

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Underwood
  • Jingyu Zhang
  • Brian Denton
  • Nilay Shah
  • Brant Inman

Abstract

We describe a simulation optimization method to design PSA screening policies based on expected quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Our method integrates a simulation model in a genetic algorithm which uses a probabilistic method for selection of the best policy. We present computational results about the efficiency of our algorithm. The best policy generated by our algorithm is compared to previously recommended screening policies. Using the policies determined by our model, we present evidence that patients should be screened more aggressively but for a shorter length of time than previously published guidelines recommend. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Underwood & Jingyu Zhang & Brian Denton & Nilay Shah & Brant Inman, 2012. "Simulation optimization of PSA-threshold based prostate cancer screening policies," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 293-309, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:hcarem:v:15:y:2012:i:4:p:293-309
    DOI: 10.1007/s10729-012-9195-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10729-012-9195-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10729-012-9195-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jagpreet Chhatwal & Oguzhan Alagoz & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2010. "Optimal Breast Biopsy Decision-Making Based on Mammographic Features and Demographic Factors," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1577-1591, December.
    2. Lisa M. Maillart & Julie Simmons Ivy & Scott Ransom & Kathleen Diehl, 2008. "Assessing Dynamic Breast Cancer Screening Policies," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(6), pages 1411-1427, December.
    3. Ruth Etzioni & Roman Gulati & Seth Falcon & David F. Penson, 2008. "Impact of PSA Screening on the Incidence of Advanced Stage Prostate Cancer in the United States: A Surveillance Modeling Approach," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(3), pages 323-331, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dimitris Bertsimas & John Silberholz & Thomas Trikalinos, 2018. "Optimal healthcare decision making under multiple mathematical models: application in prostate cancer screening," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 105-118, March.
    2. Zheng Zhang & Brian T. Denton & Todd M. Morgan, 2022. "Optimization of active surveillance strategies for heterogeneous patients with prostate cancer," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(11), pages 4021-4037, November.
    3. Elliot Lee & Mariel S. Lavieri & Michael Volk, 2019. "Optimal Screening for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Restless Bandit Model," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 198-212, January.
    4. Arthur J. Swersey & John Colberg & Ronald Evans & Michael W. Kattan & Johannes Ledolter & Rodney Parker, 2020. "Decision models for distinguishing between clinically insignificant and significant tumors in prostate cancer biopsies: an application of Bayes’ Theorem to reduce costs and improve outcomes," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 102-116, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jingyu Zhang & Brian T. Denton & Hari Balasubramanian & Nilay D. Shah & Brant A. Inman, 2012. "Optimization of Prostate Biopsy Referral Decisions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 529-547, October.
    2. Elliot Lee & Mariel Lavieri & Michael Volk & Yongcai Xu, 2015. "Applying reinforcement learning techniques to detect hepatocellular carcinoma under limited screening capacity," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 363-375, September.
    3. Robert Kraig Helmeczi & Can Kavaklioglu & Mucahit Cevik & Davood Pirayesh Neghab, 2023. "A multi-objective constrained partially observable Markov decision process model for breast cancer screening," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1-42, June.
    4. Mehmet U. S. Ayvaci & Oguzhan Alagoz & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2012. "The Effect of Budgetary Restrictions on Breast Cancer Diagnostic Decisions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 600-617, October.
    5. Mehmet A. Ergun & Ali Hajjar & Oguzhan Alagoz & Murtuza Rampurwala, 2022. "Optimal breast cancer risk reduction policies tailored to personal risk level," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 363-388, September.
    6. Wesley J. Marrero & Mariel S. Lavieri & Jeremy B. Sussman, 2021. "Optimal cholesterol treatment plans and genetic testing strategies for cardiovascular diseases," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1-25, March.
    7. Wang, Fan & Zhang, Shengfan & Henderson, Louise M., 2018. "Adaptive decision-making of breast cancer mammography screening: A heuristic-based regression model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 70-84.
    8. Elliot Lee & Mariel S. Lavieri & Michael Volk, 2019. "Optimal Screening for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Restless Bandit Model," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 198-212, January.
    9. Jonathan E. Helm & Mariel S. Lavieri & Mark P. Van Oyen & Joshua D. Stein & David C. Musch, 2015. "Dynamic Forecasting and Control Algorithms of Glaucoma Progression for Clinician Decision Support," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 979-999, October.
    10. Kotas, Jakob & Ghate, Archis, 2018. "Bayesian learning of dose–response parameters from a cohort under response-guided dosing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 328-343.
    11. Sait Tunç & Oguzhan Alagoz & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2022. "A new perspective on breast cancer diagnostic guidelines to reduce overdiagnosis," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(5), pages 2361-2378, May.
    12. Hossein Kamalzadeh & Vishal Ahuja & Michael Hahsler & Michael E. Bowen, 2021. "An Analytics‐Driven Approach for Optimal Individualized Diabetes Screening," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(9), pages 3161-3191, September.
    13. Jingyu Zhang & Brian T. Denton & Hari Balasubramanian & Nilay D. Shah & Brant A. Inman, 2012. "Optimization of PSA Screening Policies," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(2), pages 337-349, March.
    14. Jing Li & Ming Dong & Yijiong Ren & Kaiqi Yin, 2015. "How patient compliance impacts the recommendations for colorectal cancer screening," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 920-937, November.
    15. Baruch Keren & Joseph Pliskin, 2011. "Optimal timing of joint replacement using mathematical programming and stochastic programming models," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 361-369, November.
    16. Oguzhan Alagoz & Jagpreet Chhatwal & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2013. "Optimal Policies for Reducing Unnecessary Follow-Up Mammography Exams in Breast Cancer Diagnosis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 200-224, September.
    17. Malek Ebadi & Raha Akhavan-Tabatabaei, 2021. "Personalized Cotesting Policies for Cervical Cancer Screening: A POMDP Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, March.
    18. Dan Andrei Iancu & Nikolaos Trichakis & Do Young Yoon, 2021. "Monitoring with Limited Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4233-4251, July.
    19. M. Reza Skandari & Steven M. Shechter & Nadia Zalunardo, 2015. "Optimal Vascular Access Choice for Patients on Hemodialysis," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 608-619, October.
    20. Hessam Bavafa & Sergei Savin & Christian Terwiesch, 2021. "Customizing Primary Care Delivery Using E‐Visits," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(11), pages 4306-4327, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:hcarem:v:15:y:2012:i:4:p:293-309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.