Evaluation of Lung Cancer Probability Models and Guideline Recommendations in Settings With a High Prevalence of Cancer

<h3>Background</h3> Guideline-recommended management of patients with pulmonary nodules includes assessing the probability of cancer before testing. The performance of 4 models (the Mayo, Brock, Veterans Affairs [VA], and Peking University [PKU] models) has been validated in several populations, but not in a high-prevalence setting. <h3>Research Question</h3> What is the performance of lung cancer probability models within the context of a population with a high prevalence of lung cancer at a tertiary care center? <h3>Study Design and Methods</h3> Clinical and radiologic data were reviewed retrospectively for 1,518 patients with 6- to 30-mm nodules referred to a pulmonologist or thoracic surgeon at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Veterans Affairs Tennessee Valley Healthcare System Nashville Campus from 2002 through 2021 for evaluation and treatment of pulmonary nodules. Probability of cancer for each patient was calculated according to 4 validated models. Model performance was assessed based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC), calibration, sensitivity, and specificity. <h3>Results</h3> Of the total cohort (N = 1,518), 1,098 patients (72.3%) harbored a malignant nodule. The Mayo model discriminated between patients with benign and malignant nodules with the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC), 0.74. The Brock and VA models performed similarly in cohort discrimination (AUC, 0.71 and 0.70, respectively), but the VA model was better calibrated (Brier score, 0.24). The PKU model discriminated between benign and malignant nodules with the lowest AUC (0.66), but the best calibration (Brier score, 0.19). <h3>Interpretation</h3> The classification accuracy of the models did not differ greatly, but the calibration, and resulting sensitivity and specificity at guideline-recommended thresholds, was greatly dependent on the prevalence of cancer in the population in which the model was trained. The prevalence of cancer in the clinical setting should be considered when using a clinical prediction model for indeterminate pulmonary nodule management.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
CHEST Pulmonary
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chpulm.2024.100110
Primary Topic
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of Lung Cancer Probability Models and Guideline Recommendations in Settings With a High Prevalence of Cancer

Dianna J. Rowe, Samuel Whatley, Rafael Paez, Michael N. Kammer et al.
CHEST Pulmonary
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
article

Evaluation of Lung Cancer Probability Models and Guideline Recommendations in Settings With a High Prevalence of Cancer

Dianna J. Rowe, Samuel Whatley, Rafael Paez, Michael N. Kammer, Fabien Maldonado, Stephen A. Deppen, Caroline M. Godfrey, Michael A. Knight, Sophia M. Pena, Valerie Welty, Eric L. Grogan, Sanja Antic
article en

Abstract

<h3>Background</h3> Guideline-recommended management of patients with pulmonary nodules includes assessing the probability of cancer before testing. The performance of 4 models (the Mayo, Brock, Veterans Affairs [VA], and Peking University [PKU] models) has been validated in several populations, but not in a high-prevalence setting. <h3>Research Question</h3> What is the performance of lung cancer probability models within the context of a population with a high prevalence of lung cancer at a tertiary care center? <h3>Study Design and Methods</h3> Clinical and radiologic data were reviewed retrospectively for 1,518 patients with 6- to 30-mm nodules referred to a pulmonologist or thoracic surgeon at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Veterans Affairs Tennessee Valley Healthcare System Nashville Campus from 2002 through 2021 for evaluation and treatment of pulmonary nodules. Probability of cancer for each patient was calculated according to 4 validated models. Model performance was assessed based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC), calibration, sensitivity, and specificity. <h3>Results</h3> Of the total cohort (N = 1,518), 1,098 patients (72.3%) harbored a malignant nodule. The Mayo model discriminated between patients with benign and malignant nodules with the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC), 0.74. The Brock and VA models performed similarly in cohort discrimination (AUC, 0.71 and 0.70, respectively), but the VA model was better calibrated (Brier score, 0.24). The PKU model discriminated between benign and malignant nodules with the lowest AUC (0.66), but the best calibration (Brier score, 0.19). <h3>Interpretation</h3> The classification accuracy of the models did not differ greatly, but the calibration, and resulting sensitivity and specificity at guideline-recommended thresholds, was greatly dependent on the prevalence of cancer in the population in which the model was trained. The prevalence of cancer in the clinical setting should be considered when using a clinical prediction model for indeterminate pulmonary nodule management.

CHEST Pulmonary
Vanderbilt University (US), Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse (FR), VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System (US), Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.