Literature DB >> 11414591

Latent class modeling approaches for assessing diagnostic error without a gold standard: with applications to p53 immunohistochemical assays in bladder tumors.

P S Albert1, L M McShane, J H Shih.   

Abstract

Improved characterization of tumors for purposes of guiding treatment decisions for cancer patients will require that accurate and reproducible assays be developed for a variety of tumor markers. No gold standards exist for most tumor marker assays. Therefore, estimates of assay sensitivity and specificity cannot be obtained unless a latent class model-based approach is used. Our goal in this article is to estimate sensitivity and specificity for p53 immunohistochemical assays of bladder tumors using data from a reproducibility study conducted by the National Cancer Institute Bladder Tumor Marker Network. We review latent class modeling approaches proposed by previous authors, and we find that many of these approaches impose assumptions about specimen heterogeneity that are not consistent with the biology of bladder tumors. We present flexible mixture model alternatives that are biologically plausible for our example, and we use them to estimate sensitivity and specificity for our p53 assay example. These mixture models are shown to offer an improvement over other methods in a variety of settings, but we caution that, in general, care must be taken in applying latent class models.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11414591     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2001.00610.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  26 in total

1.  Evaluating Estimation Techniques in Medical Imaging Without a Gold Standard: Experimental Validation.

Authors:  John W Hoppin; Matthew A Kupinski; Donald W Wilson; Todd Peterson; Benjamin Gershman; George Kastis; Eric Clarkson; Lars Furenlid; Harrison H Barrett
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2003-02-15

2.  Corrected score estimation in the proportional hazards model with misclassified discrete covariates.

Authors:  David M Zucker; Donna Spiegelman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  On Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy From Studies With Multiple Raters and Partial Gold Standard Evaluation.

Authors:  Paul S Albert; Lori E Dodd
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 5.033

4.  Estimation and inference for case-control studies with multiple non-gold standard exposure assessments: with an occupational health application.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Stephen R Cole; Ying Wei; Joseph G Ibrahim
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 5.899

5.  Random Effects Models in a Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of Two Diagnostic Tests Without a Gold Standard.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Sining Chen; Thomas A Louis
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 5.033

6.  Optimization-Based Model Fitting for Latent Class and Latent Profile Analyses.

Authors:  Guan-Hua Huang; Su-Mei Wang; Chung-Chu Hsu
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 2.500

7.  Estimating the proportion of pneumonia attributable to pneumococcus in Kenyan adults: latent class analysis.

Authors:  Jukka Jokinen; J Anthony G Scott
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.822

8.  Estimating diagnostic accuracy of raters without a gold standard by exploiting a group of experts.

Authors:  Bo Zhang; Zhen Chen; Paul S Albert
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2012-09-24       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Comparing cardiac ejection fraction estimation algorithms without a gold standard.

Authors:  Matthew A Kupinski; John W Hoppin; Joshua Krasnow; Seth Dahlberg; Jeffrey A Leppo; Michael A King; Eric Clarkson; Harrison H Barrett
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  Estimating diagnostic accuracy of multiple binary tests with an imperfect reference standard.

Authors:  Paul S Albert
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.