IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v38y2018i1_supplp126s-139s.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): An Overview of CISNET Model Approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolien T. van Ravesteyn

    (Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Jeroen J. van den Broek

    (Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Xiaoxue Li

    (Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
    Department of Biostatistics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Harald Weedon-Fekjær

    (Center for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Research Support Services, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway)

  • Clyde B. Schechter

    (Departments of Family and Social Medicine and Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA)

  • Oguzhan Alagoz

    (Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA)

  • Xuelin Huang

    (Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA)

  • Donald L. Weaver

    (Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA)

  • Elizabeth S. Burnside

    (Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA)

  • Rinaa S. Punglia

    (Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Harry J. de Koning

    (Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Sandra J. Lee

    (Department of Biostatistics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
    Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA)

Abstract

Background. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) can be a precursor to invasive breast cancer. Since the advent of screening mammography in the 1980’s, the incidence of DCIS has increased dramatically. The value of screen detection and treatment of DCIS, however, is a matter of controversy, as it is unclear the extent to which detection and treatment of DCIS prevents invasive disease and reduces breast cancer mortality. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of existing Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modelling Network (CISNET) modeling approaches for the natural history of DCIS, and to compare these to other modeling approaches reported in the literature. Design. Five of the 6 CISNET models currently include DCIS. Most models assume that some, but not all, lesions progress to invasive cancer. The natural history of DCIS cannot be directly observed and the CISNET models differ in their assumptions and in the data sources used to estimate the DCIS model parameters. Results. These model differences translate into variation in outcomes, such as the amount of overdiagnosis of DCIS, with estimates ranging from 34% to 72% for biennial screening from ages 50 to 74 y. The other models described in the literature also report a large range in outcomes, with progression rates varying from 20% to 91%. Limitations. DCIS grade was not yet included in the CISNET models. Conclusion. In the future, DCIS data by grade from active surveillance trials, the development of predictive markers of progression probability, and evidence from other screening modalities, such as tomosynthesis, may be used to inform and improve the models’ representation of DCIS, and might lead to convergence of the model estimates. Until then, the CISNET model results consistently show a considerable amount of overdiagnosis of DCIS, supporting the safety and value of observational trials for low-risk DCIS.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolien T. van Ravesteyn & Jeroen J. van den Broek & Xiaoxue Li & Harald Weedon-Fekjær & Clyde B. Schechter & Oguzhan Alagoz & Xuelin Huang & Donald L. Weaver & Elizabeth S. Burnside & Rinaa S. Pung, 2018. "Modeling Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS): An Overview of CISNET Model Approaches," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(1_suppl), pages 126-139, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:1_suppl:p:126s-139s
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17729358
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X17729358
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X17729358?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
    ---><---

    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:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:1_suppl:p:126s-139s. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.