Literature DB >> 18320601

Systematic review of statistical methods used in molecular marker studies in cancer.

Andrew J Vickers1, Kwang Jang, Daniel Sargent, Hans Lilja, Michael W Kattan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is wide interest in the use of molecular markers for the early detection of cancer, the prediction of disease outcome, and the selection of patients for chemotherapy. Despite significant and increasing research activity, to the authors' knowledge only a small number of molecular markers have been successfully integrated into clinical practice. In the current study, the experimental designs and statistical methods used in contemporary molecular marker studies are reviewed, particularly with respect to whether these evaluated a marker's clinical value.
METHODS: MEDLINE was searched for studies that analyzed an association between a cancer outcome and a marker involving chemical analysis of body fluid or tissue. For each article, data were extracted regarding patients, markers, type of statistical analysis, and principal results.
RESULTS: The 129 articles eligible for analysis included a very large variety of molecular markers; the total number of markers was larger than the number of articles. Only a minority of articles (47 articles; 36%) incorporated multivariate modeling in which the marker was added to standard clinical variables, and only a very small minority had any measure of predictive accuracy (14 articles; 11%). No article used decision analytic methods or experimentally evaluated the clinical value of a marker. Correction for overfit was also rare (3 articles).
CONCLUSIONS: Statistical methods in molecular marker research have not focused on the clinical value of a marker. Attention to sound statistical practice, in particular the use of statistical approaches that provide clinically relevant information, will help maximize the promise of molecular markers for care of the cancer patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18320601      PMCID: PMC2675946          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23365

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  22 in total

1.  Evaluating a new marker's predictive contribution.

Authors:  Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2004-02-01       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.

Authors:  William E Barlow; Chen Chi; Patricia A Carney; Stephen H Taplin; Carl D'Orsi; Gary Cutter; R Edward Hendrick; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2004-12-15       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Soonmyung Paik; Steven Shak; Gong Tang; Chungyeul Kim; Joffre Baker; Maureen Cronin; Frederick L Baehner; Michael G Walker; Drew Watson; Taesung Park; William Hiller; Edwin R Fisher; D Lawrence Wickerham; John Bryant; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Autoantibody signatures in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Xiaoju Wang; Jianjun Yu; Arun Sreekumar; Sooryanarayana Varambally; Ronglai Shen; Donald Giacherio; Rohit Mehra; James E Montie; Kenneth J Pienta; Martin G Sanda; Philip W Kantoff; Mark A Rubin; John T Wei; Debashis Ghosh; Arul M Chinnaiyan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-22       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 5.  Clinical trial designs for predictive marker validation in cancer treatment trials.

Authors:  Daniel J Sargent; Barbara A Conley; Carmen Allegra; Laurence Collette
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-03-20       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Relevance of urine telomerase in the diagnosis of bladder cancer.

Authors:  Maria Aurora Sanchini; Roberta Gunelli; Oriana Nanni; Sara Bravaccini; Carla Fabbri; Alice Sermasi; Eduard Bercovich; Alberto Ravaioli; Dino Amadori; Daniele Calistri
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-10-26       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Selective reporting biases in cancer prognostic factor studies.

Authors:  Panayiotis A Kyzas; Konstantinos T Loizou; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-07-20       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK).

Authors:  Lisa M McShane; Douglas G Altman; Willi Sauerbrei; Sheila E Taube; Massimo Gion; Gary M Clark
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-08-17       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Circulating tumor cells, disease progression, and survival in metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  Massimo Cristofanilli; G Thomas Budd; Matthew J Ellis; Alison Stopeck; Jeri Matera; M Craig Miller; James M Reuben; Gerald V Doyle; W Jeffrey Allard; Leon W M M Terstappen; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-08-19       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 10.  Prognostic and predictive markers in cancer.

Authors:  Barbara A Conley; Sheila E Taube
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.434

View more
  14 in total

1.  New Prognostic Markers: The Pathway from Research to Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Caroline Savage; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Grand rounds Urol       Date:  2009-08

Review 2.  Tumor markers in prostate cancer I: blood-based markers.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Axel Semjonow; Hans Lilja; Caroline Savage; Andrew J Vickers; Anders Bjartell
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.089

Review 3.  Statistical consideration for clinical biomarker research in bladder cancer.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Yair Lotan; Andrew Vickers; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Bernd J Schmitz-Dräger; Peter J Goebell; Nuria Malats
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 4.  Predictive models for the practical management of renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Lui Shiong Lee; Min-Han Tan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Against diagnosis.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Ethan Basch; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 6.  Institutional shared resources and translational cancer research.

Authors:  Paolo De Paoli
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2009-06-29       Impact factor: 5.531

7.  Efficiency of study designs in diagnostic randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Bo Lu; Constantine Gatsonis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 8.  Screening for prostate cancer: an update.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Peter T Scardino; Hans Lilja
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.344

9.  Assays for prostate cancer : changing the screening paradigm?

Authors:  Jens Hansen; Michael Rink; Markus Graefen; Shahrokh Shariat; Felix K-H Chun
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.074

10.  Decision analysis for the evaluation of diagnostic tests, prediction models and molecular markers.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Am Stat       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 8.710

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.