Literature DB >> 18714084

Estimating the capacity for improvement in risk prediction with a marker.

Wen Gu1, Margaret Sullivan Pepe.   

Abstract

Consider a set of baseline predictors X to predict a binary outcome D and let Y be a novel marker or predictor. This paper is concerned with evaluating the performance of the augmented risk model P(D = 1|Y,X) compared with the baseline model P(D = 1|X). The diagnostic likelihood ratio, DLR(X)(y), quantifies the change in risk obtained with knowledge of Y = y for a subject with baseline risk factors X. The notion is commonly used in clinical medicine to quantify the increment in risk prediction due to Y. It is contrasted here with the notion of covariate-adjusted effect of Y in the augmented risk model. We also propose methods for making inference about DLR(X)(y). Case-control study designs are accommodated. The methods provide a mechanism to investigate if the predictive information in Y varies with baseline covariates. In addition, we show that when combined with a baseline risk model and information about the population distribution of Y given X, covariate-specific predictiveness curves can be estimated. These curves are useful to an individual in deciding if ascertainment of Y is likely to be informative or not for him. We illustrate with data from 2 studies: one is a study of the performance of hearing screening tests for infants, and the other concerns the value of serum creatinine in diagnosing renal artery stenosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18714084      PMCID: PMC2639345          DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxn025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biostatistics        ISSN: 1465-4644            Impact factor:   5.899


  25 in total

1.  Estimating and comparing univariate associations with application to the prediction of adult obesity.

Authors:  M S Pepe; R C Whitaker; K Seidel
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1999-01-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

Authors:  Ian M Thompson; Donna Pauler Ankerst; Chen Chi; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; M Scott Lucia; Ziding Feng; Howard L Parnes; Charles A Coltman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-04-19       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  The effect of including C-reactive protein in cardiovascular risk prediction models for women.

Authors:  Nancy R Cook; Julie E Buring; Paul M Ridker
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  A marginal regression modelling framework for evaluating medical diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W Leisenring; M S Pepe; G Longton
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1997-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Ruling out or ruling in disease with the most sensitive or specific diagnostic test: short cut or wrong turn?

Authors:  E J Boyko
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1994 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  A new logistic regression approach for the evaluation of diagnostic test results.

Authors:  A Cecile J W Janssens; Yazhong Deng; Gerard J J M Borsboom; Marinus J C Eijkemans; J Dik F Habbema; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Multiple biomarkers for the prediction of first major cardiovascular events and death.

Authors:  Thomas J Wang; Philimon Gona; Martin G Larson; Geoffrey H Tofler; Daniel Levy; Christopher Newton-Cheh; Paul F Jacques; Nader Rifai; Jacob Selhub; Sander J Robins; Emelia J Benjamin; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-12-21       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density.

Authors:  Jinbo Chen; David Pee; Rajeev Ayyagari; Barry Graubard; Catherine Schairer; Celia Byrne; Jacques Benichou; Mitchell H Gail
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction.

Authors:  Nancy R Cook
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  C-reactive protein and risk of cardiovascular disease in men and women from the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  Peter W F Wilson; Byung-Ho Nam; Michael Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Emelia J Benjamin; Christopher J O'Donnell
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2005-11-28
View more
  19 in total

1.  Estimating the diagnostic likelihood ratio of a continuous marker.

Authors:  Wen Gu; Margaret Sullivan Pepe
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2010-07-16       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  Role of Coronary Artery Calcium Score of Zero and Other Negative Risk Markers for Cardiovascular Disease: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).

Authors:  Michael J Blaha; Miguel Cainzos-Achirica; Philip Greenland; John W McEvoy; Ron Blankstein; Matthew J Budoff; Zeina Dardari; Christopher T Sibley; Gregory L Burke; Richard A Kronmal; Moyses Szklo; Roger S Blumenthal; Khurram Nasir
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Measures to summarize and compare the predictive capacity of markers.

Authors:  Wen Gu; Margaret Pepe
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 0.968

4.  Prediction of breast cancer risk by genetic risk factors, overall and by hormone receptor status.

Authors:  Anika Hüsing; Federico Canzian; Lars Beckmann; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; W Ryan Diver; Michael J Thun; Christine D Berg; Robert N Hoover; Regina G Ziegler; Jonine D Figueroa; Claudine Isaacs; Anja Olsen; Vivian Viallon; Heiner Boeing; Giovanna Masala; Dimitrios Trichopoulos; Petra H M Peeters; Eiliv Lund; Eva Ardanaz; Kay-Tee Khaw; Per Lenner; Laurence N Kolonel; Daniel O Stram; Loïc Le Marchand; Catherine A McCarty; Julie E Buring; I-Min Lee; Shumin Zhang; Sara Lindström; Susan E Hankinson; Elio Riboli; David J Hunter; Brian E Henderson; Stephen J Chanock; Christopher A Haiman; Peter Kraft; Rudolf Kaaks
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 6.318

5.  Updating risk prediction tools: a case study in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Donna P Ankerst; Tim Koniarski; Yuanyuan Liang; Robin J Leach; Ziding Feng; Martin G Sanda; Alan W Partin; Daniel W Chan; Jacob Kagan; Lori Sokoll; John T Wei; Ian M Thompson
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2011-11-17       Impact factor: 2.207

6.  Beta-d-Glucan for Diagnosing Pneumocystis Pneumonia: a Direct Comparison between the Wako β-Glucan Assay and the Fungitell Assay.

Authors:  Toine Mercier; Ellen Guldentops; Sofie Patteet; Kurt Beuselinck; Katrien Lagrou; Johan Maertens
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Comparison of approaches for incorporating new information into existing risk prediction models.

Authors:  Sonja Grill; Donna P Ankerst; Mitchell H Gail; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Ruth M Pfeiffer
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-12-11       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Estimating improvement in prediction with matched case-control designs.

Authors:  Aasthaa Bansal; Margaret Sullivan Pepe
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 1.588

9.  Spinal cord gray matter atrophy correlates with multiple sclerosis disability.

Authors:  Regina Schlaeger; Nico Papinutto; Valentina Panara; Carolyn Bevan; Iryna V Lobach; Monica Bucci; Eduardo Caverzasi; Jeffrey M Gelfand; Ari J Green; Kesshi M Jordan; William A Stern; H-Christian von Büdingen; Emmanuelle Waubant; Alyssa H Zhu; Douglas S Goodin; Bruce A C Cree; Stephen L Hauser; Roland G Henry
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 10.422

10.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Amyloid versus 18 F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Autopsy-Confirmed Dementia.

Authors:  Orit H Lesman-Segev; Renaud La Joie; Leonardo Iaccarino; Iryna Lobach; Howard J Rosen; Sang Won Seo; Mustafa Janabi; Suzanne L Baker; Lauren Edwards; Julie Pham; John Olichney; Adam Boxer; Eric Huang; Marilu Gorno-Tempini; Charles DeCarli; Mackenzie Hepker; Ji-Hye L Hwang; Bruce L Miller; Salvatore Spina; Lea T Grinberg; William W Seeley; William J Jagust; Gil D Rabinovici
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 10.422

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.