A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial.
When some individuals are screen-detected before the beginning of the study, but otherwise would have been diagnosed symptomatically during the study, this results in different case-ascertainment probabilities among screened and unscreened participants, referred to here as lead-time-biased case-asce...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5858824?pdf=render |
| _version_ | 1811230090952966144 |
|---|---|
| author | Rick J Jansen Bruce H Alexander Richard B Hayes Anthony B Miller Sholom Wacholder Timothy R Church |
| author_facet | Rick J Jansen Bruce H Alexander Richard B Hayes Anthony B Miller Sholom Wacholder Timothy R Church |
| author_sort | Rick J Jansen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | When some individuals are screen-detected before the beginning of the study, but otherwise would have been diagnosed symptomatically during the study, this results in different case-ascertainment probabilities among screened and unscreened participants, referred to here as lead-time-biased case-ascertainment (LTBCA). In fact, this issue can arise even in risk-factor studies nested within a randomized screening trial; even though the screening intervention is randomly allocated to trial arms, there is no randomization to potential risk-factors and uptake of screening can differ by risk-factor strata. Under the assumptions that neither screening nor the risk factor affects underlying incidence and no other forms of bias operate, we simulate and compare the underlying cumulative incidence and that observed in the study due to LTBCA. The example used will be constructed from the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian cancer screening trial. The derived mathematical model is applied to simulating two nested studies to evaluate the potential for screening bias in observational lung cancer studies. Because of differential screening under plausible assumptions about preclinical incidence and duration, the simulations presented here show that LTBCA due to chest x-ray screening can significantly increase the estimated risk of lung cancer due to smoking by 1% and 50%. Traditional adjustment methods cannot account for this bias, as the influence screening has on observational study estimates involves events outside of the study observation window (enrollment and follow-up) that change eligibility for potential participants, thus biasing case ascertainment. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T10:24:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e28108994205483a9d2aff5d9d81551f |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T10:24:16Z |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-e28108994205483a9d2aff5d9d81551f2022-12-22T03:37:01ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01133e019460810.1371/journal.pone.0194608A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial.Rick J JansenBruce H AlexanderRichard B HayesAnthony B MillerSholom WacholderTimothy R ChurchWhen some individuals are screen-detected before the beginning of the study, but otherwise would have been diagnosed symptomatically during the study, this results in different case-ascertainment probabilities among screened and unscreened participants, referred to here as lead-time-biased case-ascertainment (LTBCA). In fact, this issue can arise even in risk-factor studies nested within a randomized screening trial; even though the screening intervention is randomly allocated to trial arms, there is no randomization to potential risk-factors and uptake of screening can differ by risk-factor strata. Under the assumptions that neither screening nor the risk factor affects underlying incidence and no other forms of bias operate, we simulate and compare the underlying cumulative incidence and that observed in the study due to LTBCA. The example used will be constructed from the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian cancer screening trial. The derived mathematical model is applied to simulating two nested studies to evaluate the potential for screening bias in observational lung cancer studies. Because of differential screening under plausible assumptions about preclinical incidence and duration, the simulations presented here show that LTBCA due to chest x-ray screening can significantly increase the estimated risk of lung cancer due to smoking by 1% and 50%. Traditional adjustment methods cannot account for this bias, as the influence screening has on observational study estimates involves events outside of the study observation window (enrollment and follow-up) that change eligibility for potential participants, thus biasing case ascertainment.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5858824?pdf=render |
| spellingShingle | Rick J Jansen Bruce H Alexander Richard B Hayes Anthony B Miller Sholom Wacholder Timothy R Church A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. PLoS ONE |
| title | A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. |
| title_full | A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. |
| title_fullStr | A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. |
| title_full_unstemmed | A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. |
| title_short | A mathematical model of case-ascertainment bias: Applied to case-control studies nested within a randomized screening trial. |
| title_sort | mathematical model of case ascertainment bias applied to case control studies nested within a randomized screening trial |
| url | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5858824?pdf=render |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rickjjansen amathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT brucehalexander amathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT richardbhayes amathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT anthonybmiller amathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT sholomwacholder amathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT timothyrchurch amathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT rickjjansen mathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT brucehalexander mathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT richardbhayes mathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT anthonybmiller mathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT sholomwacholder mathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial AT timothyrchurch mathematicalmodelofcaseascertainmentbiasappliedtocasecontrolstudiesnestedwithinarandomizedscreeningtrial |