IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v38y2018i1_supplp54s-65s.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulating the Impact of Risk-Based Screening and Treatment on Breast Cancer Outcomes with MISCAN-Fadia

Author

Listed:
  • Jeroen J. van den Broek

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

  • Nicolien T. van Ravesteyn

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

  • Eveline A. Heijnsdijk

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

  • Harry J. de Koning

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

Abstract

The MISCAN-Fadia microsimulation model uses continuous tumor growth to simulate the natural history of breast cancer and has been used extensively to estimate the impact of screening and adjuvant treatment on breast cancer incidence and mortality trends. The model simulates individual life histories from birth to death, with and without breast cancer, in the presence and in the absence of screening and treatment. Life histories are simulated according to discrete events such as birth, tumor inception, the tumor’s clinical diagnosis diameter in the absence of screening, and death from breast cancer or death from other causes. MISCAN-Fadia consists of 4 main components: demography, natural history of breast cancer, screening, and treatment. Screening impact on the natural history of breast cancer is assessed by simulating continuous tumor growth and the “fatal diameter†concept. This concept implies that tumors diagnosed at a size that is between the screen detection threshold and the fatal diameter are cured, while tumors diagnosed at a diameter larger than the fatal tumor diameter metastasize and lead to breast cancer death. MISCAN-Fadia has been extended by including a different natural history for molecular subtypes based on a tumor’s estrogen receptor (ER) status and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. In addition, personalized screening strategies that target women based on their risk such as breast density have been incorporated into the model. This personalized approach to screening will continue to develop in light of potential polygenic risk stratification possibilities and new screening modalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeroen J. van den Broek & Nicolien T. van Ravesteyn & Eveline A. Heijnsdijk & Harry J. de Koning, 2018. "Simulating the Impact of Risk-Based Screening and Treatment on Breast Cancer Outcomes with MISCAN-Fadia," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(1_suppl), pages 54-65, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:1_suppl:p:54s-65s
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17711928
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X17711928
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X17711928?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sita Tan & Gerrit van Oortmarssen & Nanda Piersma, 2003. "Estimating Parameters of a Microsimulation Model for Breast Cancer Screening Using the Score Function Method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 119(1), pages 43-61, March.
    2. Wenjin Yin & Yiwei Jiang & Zhenzhou Shen & Zhimin Shao & Jinsong Lu, 2011. "Trastuzumab in the Adjuvant Treatment of HER2-Positive Early Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Published Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-9, June.
    3. Russell R. Barton & John S. Ivey, Jr., 1996. "Nelder-Mead Simplex Modifications for Simulation Optimization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(7), pages 954-973, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. W. Liu & Y. H. Dai, 2001. "Minimization Algorithms Based on Supervisor and Searcher Cooperation," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 111(2), pages 359-379, November.
    2. Qiong Zhou & Wenjin Yin & Yueyao Du & Jinsong Lu, 2014. "For or against Adjuvant Trastuzumab for pT1a-bN0M0 Breast Cancer Patients with HER2-Positive Tumors: A Meta-Analysis of Published Literatures," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, January.
    3. Sudarshan Kumar & Tiziana Di Matteo & Anindya S. Chakrabarti, 2020. "Disentangling shock diffusion on complex networks: Identification through graph planarity," Papers 2001.01518, arXiv.org.
    4. David G. Humphrey & James R. Wilson, 2000. "A Revised Simplex Search Procedure for Stochastic Simulation Response Surface Optimization," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 272-283, November.
    5. Caroline S Clarke & Rachael M Hunter & Ian Shemilt & Victoria Serra-Sastre, 2017. "Multi-arm Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) comparing different durations of adjuvant trastuzumab in early breast cancer, from the English NHS payer perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, March.
    6. Carolyn M. Rutter & Alan M. Zaslavsky & Eric J. Feuer, 2011. "Dynamic Microsimulation Models for Health Outcomes," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(1), pages 10-18, January.
    7. Fan, Shu-Kai S. & Zahara, Erwie, 2007. "A hybrid simplex search and particle swarm optimization for unconstrained optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 527-548, September.
    8. Hachicha, Wafik & Ammeri, Ahmed & Masmoudi, Faouzi & Chachoub, Habib, 2010. "A comprehensive literature classification of simulation optimisation methods," MPRA Paper 27652, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Chang, Kuo-Hao, 2015. "A direct search method for unconstrained quantile-based simulation optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 487-495.
    10. Galip Altinay, 2003. "Estimating growth rate in the presence of serially correlated errors," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(15), pages 967-970.
    11. Chang, Kuo-Hao, 2012. "Stochastic Nelder–Mead simplex method – A new globally convergent direct search method for simulation optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 684-694.
    12. Kao, Chiang & Chen, Shih-Pin, 2006. "A stochastic quasi-Newton method for simulation response optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(1), pages 30-46, August.
    13. M Laguna & J Molina & F Pérez & R Caballero & A G Hernández-Díaz, 2010. "The challenge of optimizing expensive black boxes: a scatter search/rough set theory approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(1), pages 53-67, January.
    14. Tazio Vanni & Jonathan Karnon & Jason Madan & Richard White & W. Edmunds & Anna Foss & Rosa Legood, 2011. "Calibrating Models in Economic Evaluation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 35-49, January.
    15. Arsham H., 1998. "Techniques for Monte Carlo Optimizing," Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 181-230, December.
    16. Pinto, Roberto, 2016. "Stock rationing under a profit satisficing objective," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 55-68.
    17. David J. Eckman & Shane G. Henderson & Sara Shashaani, 2023. "Diagnostic Tools for Evaluating and Comparing Simulation-Optimization Algorithms," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 350-367, March.
    18. Satyajith Amaran & Nikolaos V. Sahinidis & Bikram Sharda & Scott J. Bury, 2016. "Simulation optimization: a review of algorithms and applications," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 240(1), pages 351-380, May.
    19. Rosen, Scott L. & Harmonosky, Catherine M. & Traband, Mark T., 2007. "A simulation optimization method that considers uncertainty and multiple performance measures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(1), pages 315-330, August.
    20. Davis, Peter & Lay-Yee, Roy & Pearson, Janet, 2010. "Using micro-simulation to create a synthesised data set and test policy options: The case of health service effects under demographic ageing," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(2-3), pages 267-274, October.

    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:54s-65s. 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: 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.