Development and Validation of a Prediction Model to Estimate Individual Risk of Pancreatic Cancer
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: There is no reliable screening tool to identify people with high risk of developing pancreatic cancer even though pancreatic cancer represents the fifth-leading cause of cancer-related death in Korea. The goal of this study was to develop an individualized risk prediction model that can be used to screen for asymptomatic pancreatic cancer in Korean men and women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gender-specific risk prediction models for pancreatic cancer were developed using the Cox proportional hazards model based on an 8-year follow-up of a cohort study of 1,289,933 men and 557,701 women in Korea who had biennial examinations in 1996-1997. The performance of the models was evaluated with respect to their discrimination and calibration ability based on the C-statistic and Hosmer-Lemeshow type χ2 statistic. RESULTS: A total of 1,634 (0.13%) men and 561 (0.10%) women were newly diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Age, height, BMI, fasting glucose, urine glucose, smoking, and age at smoking initiation were included in the risk prediction model for men. Height, BMI, fasting glucose, urine glucose, smoking, and drinking habit were included in the risk prediction model for women. Smoking was the most significant risk factor for developing pancreatic cancer in both men and women. The risk prediction model exhibited good discrimination and calibration ability, and in external validation it had excellent prediction ability. CONCLUSION: Gender-specific risk prediction models for pancreatic cancer were developed and validated for the first time. The prediction models will be a useful tool for detecting high-risk individuals who may benefit from increased surveillance for pancreatic cancer.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A South Korean time-to-event model using routine health examination data performed as well as the UK model (AUC 0.81) but had low positive predictive value (0.3-0.4% risk over 10 years) because it was evaluated in the general unselected population aged 40 years and older.
“This model performed as well (AUC=0·81) as the UK model,105 but had low positive predictive value (0·3–0·4% risk over 10 years) because it was evaluated in the general unselected population aged 40 years and older.108”
From Early detection of pancreatic cancer (2020) · cites this paper as [108]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Frequent detection of pancreatic lesions in asymptomatic high-risk individuals
Canto, M. I., Hruban, R. H., Fishman, E. K., Kamel, I. R., Schulick, R., Zhang, Z., Topazian, M., Takahashi, N., Fletcher, J., Petersen, G., et al. (2012) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.01.005 · Cited by 648 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Early detection of pancreatic cancer
Pereira, S. P., Oldfield, L., Ney, A., Hart, P. A., Keane, M. G., Pandol, S. J., Li, D., Greenhalf, W., Jeon, C. Y., Koay, E. J., et al. (2020) · The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1016/s2468-1253(19)30416-9 · Cited by 482 · see citing works
Pancreatic Cancer Prediction Through an Artificial Neural Network
Muhammad, W., Hart, G. R., Nartowt, B., Farrell, J. J., Johung, K., Liang, Y., & Deng, J. (2019) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2019.00002 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Baecker, A., Kim, S., Risch, H. A., Nuckols, T. K., Wu, B. U., Hendifar, A. E., Pandol, S. J., Pisegna, J. R., & Jeon, C. Y. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0218580 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Prediction of Pancreatic Cancer Based on Imaging Features in Patients With Duct Abnormalities
Chen, W., Butler, R. K., Zhou, Y., Parker, R. A., Jeon, C. Y., & Wu, B. U. (2020) · Pancreas · doi:10.1097/mpa.0000000000001499 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
- Authors
- Yu, A., Woo, S. M., Joo, J., Yang, H.-R., Lee, W. J., Park, S.-J., & Nam, B.-H.
- Affiliations
- National Cancer Center (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Nam, Byung-Ho
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2016-01-11
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e0146473
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4708985
- OpenAlex
- W2234385106
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 2.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
- Keywords
- pancreatic cancer, cancer screening, smoking as risk factor, fasting blood glucose, urine glucose, body mass index, height, alcohol consumption, Korean population, cancer surveillance
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Smoking, Cohort Studies, Proportional Hazards Models, Age Distribution, Republic of Korea
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review