Martin Schumacher1, Harald Binder, Thomas Gerds. 1. Department of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Institute of Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Freiburg, Germany. sec@imbi.uni-freiburg.de
Abstract
MOTIVATION: In the process of developing risk prediction models, various steps of model building and model selection are involved. If this process is not adequately controlled, overfitting may result in serious overoptimism leading to potentially erroneous conclusions. METHODS: For right censored time-to-event data, we estimate the prediction error for assessing the performance of a risk prediction model (Gerds and Schumacher, 2006; Graf et al., 1999). Furthermore, resampling methods are used to detect overfitting and resulting overoptimism and to adjust the estimates of prediction error (Gerds and Schumacher, 2007). RESULTS: We show how and to what extent the methodology can be used in situations characterized by a large number of potential predictor variables where overfitting may be expected to be overwhelming. This is illustrated by estimating the prediction error of some recently proposed techniques for fitting a multivariate Cox regression model applied to the data of a prognostic study in patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). AVAILABILITY: Resampling-based estimation of prediction error curves is implemented in an R package called pec available from the authors.
MOTIVATION: In the process of developing risk prediction models, various steps of model building and model selection are involved. If this process is not adequately controlled, overfitting may result in serious overoptimism leading to potentially erroneous conclusions. METHODS: For right censored time-to-event data, we estimate the prediction error for assessing the performance of a risk prediction model (Gerds and Schumacher, 2006; Graf et al., 1999). Furthermore, resampling methods are used to detect overfitting and resulting overoptimism and to adjust the estimates of prediction error (Gerds and Schumacher, 2007). RESULTS: We show how and to what extent the methodology can be used in situations characterized by a large number of potential predictor variables where overfitting may be expected to be overwhelming. This is illustrated by estimating the prediction error of some recently proposed techniques for fitting a multivariate Cox regression model applied to the data of a prognostic study in patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). AVAILABILITY: Resampling-based estimation of prediction error curves is implemented in an R package called pec available from the authors.
Authors: Vinicius Bonato; Veerabhadran Baladandayuthapani; Bradley M Broom; Erik P Sulman; Kenneth D Aldape; Kim-Anh Do Journal: Bioinformatics Date: 2010-12-08 Impact factor: 6.937
Authors: Nikolaus Jahn; Tobias Terzer; Eric Sträng; Anna Dolnik; Sibylle Cocciardi; Ekaterina Panina; Andrea Corbacioglu; Julia Herzig; Daniela Weber; Anika Schrade; Katharina Götze; Thomas Schröder; Michael Lübbert; Dominique Wellnitz; Elisabeth Koller; Richard F Schlenk; Verena I Gaidzik; Peter Paschka; Frank G Rücker; Michael Heuser; Felicitas Thol; Arnold Ganser; Axel Benner; Hartmut Döhner; Lars Bullinger; Konstanze Döhner Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-12-22
Authors: Zejuan Li; Tobias Herold; Chunjiang He; Peter J M Valk; Ping Chen; Vindi Jurinovic; Ulrich Mansmann; Michael D Radmacher; Kati S Maharry; Miao Sun; Xinan Yang; Hao Huang; Xi Jiang; Maria-Cristina Sauerland; Thomas Büchner; Wolfgang Hiddemann; Abdel Elkahloun; Mary Beth Neilly; Yanming Zhang; Richard A Larson; Michelle M Le Beau; Michael A Caligiuri; Konstanze Döhner; Lars Bullinger; Paul P Liu; Ruud Delwel; Guido Marcucci; Bob Lowenberg; Clara D Bloomfield; Janet D Rowley; Stefan K Bohlander; Jianjun Chen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ewout W Steyerberg; Andrew J Vickers; Nancy R Cook; Thomas Gerds; Mithat Gonen; Nancy Obuchowski; Michael J Pencina; Michael W Kattan Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.822