Abstract
Calibration, a critical step in the development of simulation models, involves adjusting unobservable parameters to ensure that the outcomes of the model closely align with observed target data. This process is particularly vital in cancer simulation models with a natural history component where direct data to inform natural history parameters are rarely available. This work reviews the literature of cancer simulation models with a natural history component and identifies the calibration approaches used in these models with respect to the following attributes: calibration target, goodness-of-fit (GOF) measure, parameter search algorithm, acceptance criteria, and stopping rules. After a comprehensive search of the PubMed database from 1981 to June 2023, 68 studies were included in the review. Nearly all (n=66) articles specified the calibration targets, and most articles (n=56) specified the parameter search algorithms they used, whereas goodness-of-fit metric (n=51) and acceptance criteria/stopping rule (n=45) were reported for fewer times. The most frequently used calibration targets were incidence, mortality, and prevalence, whose data sources primarily come from cancer registries and observational studies. The most used goodness-of-fit measure was weighted mean squared error. Random search has been the predominant method for parameter search, followed by grid search and Nelder-mead method. Machine learning-based algorithms, despite their fast advancement in the recent decade, has been underutilized in the cancer simulation models. More research is needed to compare different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.
Key points
This work reviewed the literature of cancer simulation models with a natural history component and identified the calibration approaches used in these models with respect to the following attributes: calibration target, goodness-of-fit (GOF) measure, parameter search algorithm, acceptance criteria, and stopping rules.
Random search has been the predominant method for parameter search, followed by grid search and Nelder-mead method.
Machine learning-based algorithms, despite their fast advancement in the recent decade, has been underutilized in the cancer simulation models. Furthermore, more research is needed to compare different parameter search algorithms used for calibration.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Alagoz reports grants from NIH, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Exact Sciences, other from Innovo Analytics, outside the submitted work. Mr. Zhang has no conflict of interest to report.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under National Cancer Institute Grant R01CA251566. The funding agreement ensured the authors independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding source: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under National Cancer Institute Grant R01CA251566. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report.
Conflict of Interest statement: Dr. Alagoz reports grants from NIH, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Exact Sciences, other from Innovo Analytics, outside the submitted work. Mr. Zhang has no conflict of interest to report.
Data Availability
not applicable
