Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
Mini Review

Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Review

Aung Ko Win, Robert J. MacInnis, John L. Hopper and Mark A. Jenkins
Aung Ko Win
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert J. MacInnis
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John L. Hopper
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark A. Jenkins
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0771 Published March 2012
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

  • Table 1.

    Summary of the previously developed CRC risk prediction models

    Factors included
    ModelStudy design and sampleMethodsFamily historyEnvironmental factorsHigh-risk genetic mutationsResidual risk factorsaApplicabilityStrengthsLimitations
    Colditz and colleagues (63) Harvard Cancer Risk IndexEstimated parameters from published data and expert opinionScoring for each risk factor based on strengths of associations from the previous logistic regression analysesFDR with colon cancer (yes/no)BMI, screening (FOBT and sigmoidoscopy), aspirin, inflammatory bowel disease, folate, vegetables, alcohol, height, physical activity, estrogen replacement, OC, red meat, fruits, fiber, saturated fat, cigarette smokingNoneNonePredicts 10-y risk of colon cancerEase of useMay not be applicable to rectal cancer risk prediction. Does not consider family history in relatives beyond first degree and is not applicable for people with a high-risk genetic mutation.
    Imperiale and colleagues (84)A cross-sectional study of 1,994 asymptomatic individuals aged ≥50 years identified between 1995 and 2001Scoring for each risk factor (method for score undefined)NoneAge, sex, most advanced distal nonmalignant neoplasm (no polyps; hyperplasia; tubular adenoma <1 cm; advanced lesion—tubular adenoma >1 cm, any polyp with villous histology or severe dysplasia or cancer)NoneNoneDetermines the need for screening colonoscopy based on the findings of a flexible sigmoidoscopy. Predicts risk of proximal colon cancer.Improves efficiency of CRC screeningLimited to individuals having a sigmoidoscopy. May not be applicable to people aged younger than 50 y. Is not applicable for people with strong family history or with a high-risk genetic mutation.
    Driver and colleagues (80)A prospective cohort of 21,581 men aged 40 to 84 years (Physician's Health Study); followed-up from 1982 to 2004; 485 incident CRC cases.Logistic regressionNoneAge, smoking, alcohol, BMI [diabetes, physical activity, vegetables, cold cereal multivitamins, vitamin C, and vitamin E were considered but not included in the model]NoneNoneProvides CRC risk score. Predicts 20-y risk of CRC for menEase of use. Based on large sampleLimited to males. Is not applicable to people with a strong family history or with a high-risk genetic mutation.
    Freedman and colleagues (64)2,263 cases and 2,833 controls of non-Hispanic white men and women aged ≥50 years identified between 1991–1994 (colon) and 1997–2001 (rectal)Logistic regressionFDR with CRC (yes/no), number of FDR with CRC (0, 1, ≥2)Age, sex, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, current leisure time activity, aspirin and NSAIDs, cigarette smoking, vegetables, BMI, and hormone replacementNoneNonePredicts 5-, 10-, and 20-y, and lifetime risk of developing CRC for men and women older than 50 yUser friendly web version available (108) Based on large sampleMay not be applicable to people younger than 50 y. Does not consider family history in relatives beyond first degree. Is not applicable to people with a strong family history or with a high-risk genetic mutation
    Wei and colleagues (65)A prospective cohort of 83,767 women aged 30 to 54 years (Nurses' Health Study); follow-up from 1976 to 2004; 701 incident colon cancer cases.Nonlinear Poisson regressionFDR with CRC (yes/no)Age, sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, physical activity, aspirin, cigarette smoking, processed meat or red meat, folate, height, BMI, and hormone replacementNoneNonePredicts cumulative risk of colon cancer for women aged 30 to 70 yEase of use. Based on large sampleMay not be applicable to men or to any women aged older than 70 y. Does not consider family history in relatives beyond first degree. Is not applicable to people with a strong family history or with a high-risk genetic mutation. May not be applicable for rectal cancer risk
    Ma and colleagues (83)A prospective cohort of 28,115 men aged 40 to 69 years (Japan Public Health Center–based study–Cohort II); followed-up from 1993 to 2005 (mean, 11.0 y); 543 incident CRC cases.Cox proportional hazards modelNone [FDR with CRC (yes/no) was considered, but not included in the model]Age, BMI, physical activity, smoking, alcohol [diabetes was considered but not included in the model]NoneNoneProvides CRC risk score and predicts 10-y risk of CRC for Japanese men.Ease of useMay not be applicable to non-Japanese or to Japanese females. Is not applicable to people with strong family history or with a high-risk genetic mutation
    Chen and colleagues (70) MMRproEstimated parameters from published dataBayesian/segregation analysisFDR and SDR: specific relationship to the proband, history of CRC/EC (yes, no), age at diagnosis, MSI status, and MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 mutation statusAge, race/ethnicity,MLH1, MSH2, MSH6NonePredicts probability of carrying MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 mutations Predicts 5-y and lifetime risk of CRC and ECIncluded specific family history to second-degree. Uses stand-alone software package that is freely availableDoes not consider family history in relatives beyond second degree. May not be applicable to PMS2 mutation carriers. Does not estimate risk of second primary (metachronous) CRC. Is not applicable to MUTYH mutation carriers.
    Cleveland Clinic Tool (109)UnreportedUnknownFDR and SDR: specific relationship to the proband, history of CRC and polyps (yes, no), age at diagnosis of CRC (<50, 50–60, ≥60), age at diagnosis of polyps (<60, ≥60)Age (<50, ≥50), sex, ethnicity, weight, height, CRC screening (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, FOBT), fruit and vegetables consumption, smoking, exercise, person history of CRC and polypsNoneNoneProvides CRC risk score (average/medium/high)User friendly web version available (109)Not possible to assess as methods used for development of this tool have not been published. Does not predict cumulative risk over a specified period

    Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; EC, endometrial cancer; FDR, first-degree relative; FOBT, fecal occult blood test; MSI, microsatellite instability of tumor; NSAID, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; OC, oral contraceptive; SDR, second-degree relative.

    • ↵aFamilial aggregation that is not explained by known risk factors (including genetic and environmental risk factors shared by family members).

  • Table 2.

    Summary of studies that evaluated CRC risk prediction models

    StudyModel evaluatedSampleFeatures evaluatedKey findings
    Kim and colleagues (85)Harvard Caner Risk Index (63)A prospective cohort of 38,953 men aged 40 to 70 years (Health Professionals Follow-up Study); follow-up from 1986 to 1996; 230 incident CRC cases. A prospective cohort of 52,668 women aged 40 to 70 years (Nurses' Health Study); follow-up from 1984 to 1994; 244 incident CRC cases.Calibration, discrimination, and utilityOverestimated the number of CRC for men within “much below average risk” and “very much below average risk” risk categories. Well calibrated for women. Modest discrimination: c = 0.71 (95% CI, 0.68–0.74) for men and 0.67 (95%CI, 0.64–0.70) for women.
    Emmons and colleagues (86)Harvard Caner Risk Index (63)In-depth cognitive interviews with 9 individuals from the general population; and 9 focus groups (6 females and 3 males) aged ≥40 yearsMeaning of risk, perceptions about cancer, and interpretation of the results66% extremely/very satisfied, 32% somewhat satisfied with the model format. 86% extremely/very satisfied, 13% somewhat satisfied with the information provided in the model. 3% not at all satisfied with the model. Some dissatisfied because exposures that they believed to be important were not included (e.g., poverty, toxic waste, air pollution) Difficult for participants in completing the HCRI in its paper-and-pencil form.
    Emmons and colleagues (87)Harvard Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Communication Tool for Research (HCCRACT-R; ref. 63)A randomized control trial on 159 men and 194 women aged 40 to 70 years without previous personal history of cancer. Intervention groups: those receiving (i) presentation of both absolute and relative risk (ii) presentation of absolute risk only Control group: those without receiving any personal risk informationAccuracy of risk perception, and, level of worry and satisfactionSignificant changes in risk perception accuracy for both relative risk (P = 0.01) and absolute risk (P = 0.001) across intervention groups. Of those with inaccurate absolute risk perception at baseline, 54% of the participants in the group who received presentation of both absolute and relative risk, and 64% of those in the group who received presentation of absolute risk only, had correct absolute risk perception at post-test, compared with only 12% of the control group. 13% less worried, 17% more worried about getting CRC after completing the HCCRACT-R.
    Imperiale and colleagues (84)Imperiale (84)A cross-sectional study on 1,031 asymptomatic individuals aged ≥50 years undergoing first-time screening colonoscopy between 1999 and 2001DiscriminationModest discrimination: c = 0.74 (SD = 0.06)
    Park and colleagues (88)Freedman (64)A prospective cohort of 155,345 men and 108,057 women aged 50 to 71 years (American Association of Retired Persons—diet and health study); follow-up from 1995 to 2003 (mean, 6.9 y); 2,092 male and 965 female incident CRC cases.Calibration and discriminationWell calibrated for men (E/O = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95–1.04) and for women (E/O = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98–1.11) overall. Overestimated risk for men with one affected relative (E/O = 1.35; 95% CI, 1.17–1.55); women with one affected relative (E/O = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00–1.45); men with 2 affected relatives (E/O = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.00–2.19); and men who had a history of screening and polyps (E/O = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.24–1.63). Underestimated risk for men who had a history of screening with no polyps (E/O = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.62–0.72). Modest discriminatory accuracy: c = 0.61 (95% CI, 0.60–0.62) for men and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.59–0.62) for women
    Ma and colleagues (83)Ma (83)A prospective cohort of 18,256 men aged 40 to 59 years (Japan Public Health Center-based study—Cohort I); follow-up from 1990 to 2005 (mean, 10.1 y); 389 incident CRC cases.Calibration and discriminationUnderestimation for colon cancer: O/E = 1.19 (95% CI, 1.03–1.37). Well calibrated for rectal cancer (O/E = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78–1.12) and for CRC overall (O/E = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.98–1.23) Modest discriminatory accuracy: c = 0.64 (95% CI, 0.61–0.67) for CRC, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.62–0.70) for colon cancer, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.57–0.66) for rectal cancer

    Abbreviations: c, concordance statistic; E, expected; O, observed.

    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 21 (3)
    March 2012
    Volume 21, Issue 3
    • Table of Contents
    • Table of Contents (PDF)

    Sign up for alerts

    View this article with LENS

    Open full page PDF
    Article Alerts
    Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
    Email Article

    Thank you for sharing this Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention article.

    NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Review
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    (Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
    Citation Tools
    Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Review
    Aung Ko Win, Robert J. MacInnis, John L. Hopper and Mark A. Jenkins
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev March 1 2012 (21) (3) 398-410; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0771

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Share
    Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer: A Review
    Aung Ko Win, Robert J. MacInnis, John L. Hopper and Mark A. Jenkins
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev March 1 2012 (21) (3) 398-410; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0771
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • Abstract
      • Introduction
      • Predicting Risk of CRC
      • Existing Risk Prediction Models for CRC
      • Evaluation of Risk Prediction Models
      • Future Perspective
      • Conclusions
      • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
      • Grant Support
      • References
    • Figures & Data
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    Advertisement

    Related Articles

    Cited By...

    • Home
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Privacy Policy
    Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

    Articles

    • Online First
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues

    Info for

    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Librarians
    • Reviewers

    About Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

    • About the Journal
    • Editorial Board
    • Permissions
    • Submit a Manuscript
    AACR logo

    Copyright © 2019 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

    Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    eISSN: 1538-7755
    ISSN: 1055-9965

    Advertisement