Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

VA Health Systems Research

Go to the VA ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

A prognostic model for advanced colorectal neoplasia recurrence.

Liu L, Messer K, Baron JA, Lieberman DA, Jacobs ET, Cross AJ, Murphy G, Martinez ME, Gupta S. A prognostic model for advanced colorectal neoplasia recurrence. Cancer Causes & Control : Ccc. 2016 Oct 1; 27(10):1175-85.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions


PURPOSE: Following colonoscopic polypectomy, US Multisociety Task Force (USMSTF) guidelines stratify patients based on risk of subsequent advanced neoplasia (AN) using number, size, and histology of resected polyps, but have only moderate sensitivity and specificity. We hypothesized that a state-of-the-art statistical prediction model might improve identification of patients at high risk of future AN and address these challenges. METHODS: Data were pooled from seven prospective studies which had follow-up ascertainment of metachronous AN within 3-5 years of baseline polypectomy (combined n  =  8,228). Pooled data were randomly split into training (n  =  5,483) and validation (n  =  2,745) sets. A prognostic model was developed using best practices. Two risk cut-points were identified in the training data which achieved a 10 percentage point improvement in sensitivity and specificity, respectively, over current USMSTF guidelines. Clinical benefit of USMSTF versus model-based risk stratification was then estimated using validation data. RESULTS: The final model included polyp location, prior polyp history, patient age, and number, size and histology of resected polyps. The first risk cut-point improved sensitivity but with loss of specificity. The second risk cut-point improved specificity without loss of sensitivity (specificity 46.2 % model vs. 42.1 % guidelines, p  <  0.001; sensitivity 75.8 % model vs. 74.0 % guidelines, p  =  0.64). Estimated AUC was 65 % (95 % CI: 62-69 %). CONCLUSION: This model-based approach allows flexibility in trading sensitivity and specificity, which can optimize colonoscopy over- versus underuse rates. Only modest improvements in prognostic power are possible using currently available clinical data. Research considering additional factors such as adenoma detection rate for risk prediction appears warranted.

Questions about the HSR website? Email the Web Team

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.