1 / 14

Primary Prevention of Disease

The Problem with Individual Risk Beverly Rockhill, Ph.D. Department of Epidemiology University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Primary Prevention of Disease. Mass diseases and mass exposures require mass remedies-- Geoffrey Rose

carl
Download Presentation

Primary Prevention of Disease

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Problem with Individual RiskBeverly Rockhill, Ph.D.Department of EpidemiologyUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

  2. Primary Prevention of Disease • Mass diseases and mass exposures require mass remedies--Geoffrey Rose • Environmental, behavioral, and medical interventions should, and will, be targeted to each person’s genetic susceptibility--Muin Khoury

  3. How to identify high-risk individuals? • Most identified chronic disease risk factors have only modest associations with disease—RRs 1.5-3.0

  4. How to identify high-risk individuals? • For most diseases, large majority of individuals will remain disease-free over considered time period, and “individual” risk estimates will tend to cluster at low end • Bulk of disease cases will arise from mass of population with risk factor values ("individual risk") around average

  5. Boxplots of 14-year estimated risk of lung cancer, according to baseline smoking status (NHS)

  6. Assessing accuracy of prediction at individual level Calibration vs. discriminatory accuracy • Calibration=goodness of fit; extent of bias in model estimation. E.g., if average predicted risk for group of individuals is 0.10, and 10% of persons develop disease over time interval, model well-calibrated. • Discrimination: ability to separate individuals with different outcomes.

  7. Risk factors as screening tools Risk prediction tool must have large associated relative risk (>>20) comparing extremes of exposure or predicted risk in order to serve as useful screening tool at individual level

  8. RRq1-5 = 2

  9. RRq1-5 = 20

  10. RRq1-5 = 200

  11. Main points • Sensitivity and specificity, and resulting positive predictive value, of most risk factors/risk models are poor. NPV higher, obviously, but key question is “how much is gained, given knowledge of risk factors, above and beyond knowledge of average risk/incidence in population?” • Individuals concerned with these quantities, since they address question “what does this information mean for ME?”, rather than with good calibration, statistically significant predictors, etc.

  12. Critical questions • Is there a systematic “rational” way that individuals should act on “individual risk” information? Would a “rational”individual make a change in diet to lower 5-year risk of colon cancer from 15/10,000 to 8/10,000? Take a drug to lower risk of breast cancer from 2% to 1% in 5 years? • Where does education end, and persuasion begin? • Do communicators have full understanding of what they are communicating?

  13. General conclusions • As long as poor ability to single out small minority of individuals who will develop disease remains, a prevention strategy built upon idea of individual risk prediction and communication will have to affect many (i.e., persuade many to change or act) in order to prevent disease in a few

  14. General conclusions • “Mass remedies” needed; which are socially, ethically acceptable, and logically supportable?

More Related