Health Care Management Science

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 1–21

Probability model for estimating colorectal polyp progression rates

  • Chaitra Gopalappa
  • Selen Aydogan-Cremaschi
  • Tapas K. Das
  • Seza Orcun
Article

Abstract

According to the American Cancer Society, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cause of cancer related deaths in the United States. Experts estimate that about 85% of CRCs begin as precancerous polyps, early detection and treatment of which can significantly reduce the risk of CRC. Hence, it is imperative to develop population-wide intervention strategies for early detection of polyps. Development of such strategies requires precise values of population-specific rates of incidence of polyp and its progression to cancerous stage. There has been a considerable amount of research in recent years on developing screening based CRC intervention strategies. However, these are not supported by population-specific mathematical estimates of progression rates. This paper addresses this need by developing a probability model that estimates polyp progression rates considering race and family history of CRC; note that, it is ethically infeasible to obtain polyp progression rates through clinical trials. We use the estimated rates to simulate the progression of polyps in the population of the State of Indiana, and also the population of a clinical trial conducted in the State of Minnesota, which was obtained from literature. The results from the simulations are used to validate the probability model.

Keywords

Colorectal cancer Disease progression CRC intervention Polyp progression CRC simulation Applied probability 

References

  1. 1.
    Morson B (1974) The polyp-cancer sequence in the large bowel. Proc R Soc Med 67:451–457Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Neugut AI, Jacobson JS, DeVivo I (1993) Epidemiology of colorectal adenomatous polyps. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 2:159–176Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leslie A, Carey FA, Pratt NR, Steele RJC (2002) The colorectal adenoma–carcinoma sequence. Br J Surg 89:845–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Loeve F, Boer R, Oortmarssen GJ, Ballegooijen MV, Habbema JDF (1999) The miscan–colon simulation model for the evaluation of colorectal cancer screening. Comput Biomed Res 32:13–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Loeve F, Brown ML, Boer R, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JDF (2000) Endoscopic colorectal cancer screening: a cost-saving analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 92(7):557–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roberts S, Wang L, Klein R, Ness R, Dittus R (2007) Development of a simulation model of colorectal cancer. ACM Trans Model Comput Simul 18(1):1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harper PR, Jones SK (2005) Mathematical models for the early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer. Health Care Manag Sci 8:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khandker RK, Dulski JD, Kilpatrick JB, Ellis RP, Mitchell JB, Baine WB (2000) A decision model and cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening and surveillance guidelines for average-risk adults. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 16(3):799–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wagner JL, Tunis S, Brown M, Ching A, Almeida R (1996) The cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in average-risk adults. In: Young GP, Rozen P, Levin B (eds) Prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 321–356Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clemen RT, Lacke CJ (2001) Analysis of colorectal cancer screening regimens. Health Care Manag Sci 4:257–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leshno M, Halpern Z, Arber N (2003) Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in the average risk population. Health Care Manag Sci 6:165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vijan S, Hwang EW, Hofer TP, Hayward RA (2001) Which colon cancer screening test a comparison of costs, effectiveness, and compliance. Am J Med 111:593–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Cancer Institute NCI (2007) Cisnet-cancer intervention and surveillance modeling network. http://cisnet.cancer.gov/colorectal/profiles.html, http://cisnet.cancer.gov/publications/#Colorectal. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  14. 14.
    Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Miller L, Godlee F, Stolar MH, Mulrow CD, Woolf SH, Glick SN, Ganiats TG, Bond JH, Rosen L, Zapka JG, Olsen SJ, Giargiello FM, Sisk JE, Van Antwerp R, Brown-Davis C, Marciniak DA, Mayer RJ (1997) Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale. Gastroenterology 112:594–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Loeve F, Boer R, Zauber AG, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, Winawer SJ, Habbema JDF (2004) National polyp study data: evidence for regression of adenomas. Int J Cancer 111:633–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brenner H, Hoffmeister M, Stegmaier C, Brenner G, Altenhofen L, Haug U (2007) Risk of progression of advanced adenomas to colorectal cancer by age and sex: estimates based on 840,149 screening colonoscopies. Gut 56:1585–1589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wong J-M, Yen M-F, Lai M-S, Duffy SW, Smith RA, Chen TH-H (2004) Progression rates of colorectal cancer by duke’s stage in a high-risk group: analysis of selective colorectal cancer screening. Cancer J 10(3):160–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Soetikno RM, Kaltenbach T, Rouse RV, Park W, Maheshwari A, Sato T, Matsui S, Friedland S (2008) Prevalence of nonpolypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms in asymptomatic and symptomatic adults. J Am Med Assoc 299(9):1027–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dukes CE (1932) The classification of cancer of the rectum. J Pathol Bacteriol 35(3):323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schoen RL, Pinsky PF, Weissfeld JL, Bresalier RS, Church T, Prorok P, Gohagan JK (2003) Results of repeat sigmoidoscopy 3 years after a negative examination. J Am Med Assoc 290(1):41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harewood GC, Lawlor GO (2005) Incident rates of colonic neoplasia according to age and gender. J Clin Gastroenterol 39(10):894–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Noe M, Schroy P, Babayan R, Demierre M-F, Geller AC (2008) Increased cancer risk for individuals with a family history of prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and melanoma and their associated recommendations and practices. Cancer Causes Control 19:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Epidemiology Resource Center Indiana State Department of Health and Division of Chronic/Communicable Disease (2004) Cancer incidence and mortality in Indiana. http://www.in.gov/isdh/reports/cancerinc/2004/section2c.htm. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  24. 24.
    American Cancer Society (2008) Cancer facts and figures 2008. American Cancer Society, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Winawer SJ, Fletcher RH, Rex D, Bond J, Burt R, Ferrucci J, Ganiats T, Levin T, Woolf S, Johnson D, Kirk L, Litin S, Simmang C (2003) Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationaleŮupdate based on new evidence. Gastroenterology 124:544–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jenkins L, Bradshaw D, Cannon P, Gierisch J, Freas W (2003) Colorectal cancer screening in local health departments—a pilot project of the North Carolina Advisory Committee on Cancer Coordination and Control and the North Carolina Division of Public HealthGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Epidemiology Resource Center Indiana State Department of Health and Division of Chronic/Communicable Disease (2004) Cancer incidence and mortality in Indiana. http://www.in.gov/isdh/reports/cancerinc/2004/section2r.htm. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  28. 28.
    American Cancer Society (2008) Cancer facts and figures 2008–2010. American Cancer Society, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Epidemiology Resource Center Indiana State Department of Health and Division of Chronic/Communicable Disease (2004) Cancer incidence and mortality in Indiana. http://www.in.gov/isdh/reports/cancerinc/2004/section2s.htm. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  30. 30.
    Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Mary BG, Schuman LM, Ederer F (1993) Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. New Engl J Med 328(19):1365–1371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mandel JS, Church TR, Ederer F, Bond JH (1999) Colorectal cancer mortality: effectiveness of biennial screening for fecal occult blood. J Natl Cancer Inst 91(5):434–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gilbertsen VA, McHugh R, Schuman L, Williams SE (1980) The earlier detection of colorectal cancers. Cancer 45:2899–2901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Argonne National Lab ANL (2007) Repast-recursive porous agent simulation toolkit. http://repast.sourceforge.net/. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  34. 34.
    Epidemiology Resource Center/Data Analysis Team Indiana State Department of Health (2002) Indiana health behavior risk factors 2001 state survey data. http://www.in.gov/isdh/reports/brfss/2001/index.htm. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  35. 35.
    Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Schrag D, Boer R, Winawer SJ, Habbema JDF, Zauber AG (2006) How much can current interventions reduce colorectal cancer mortality in the US. Cancer 107(7):1624–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    National Cancer Institute (2006) Surveillance epidemiology and end results. http://seer.cancer.gov/faststats/selections.php#Output. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  37. 37.
    US Census Bureau (2009) 2006–2008 American community survey 3-year estimates. http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts. Accessed on 3 February 2009
  38. 38.
    National Cancer Institute (2009) Prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial (plco). http://prevention.cancer.gov/programs-resources/groups/ed/programs/plco. Accessed on 3 February 2009

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaitra Gopalappa
    • 1
  • Selen Aydogan-Cremaschi
    • 2
  • Tapas K. Das
    • 1
  • Seza Orcun
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Management Systems EngineeringUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemical EngineeringUniversity of TulsaTulsaUSA
  3. 3.Discovery ParkPurdue UniversityINUSA

Personalised recommendations