Literature DB >> 19459841

A parametric ROC model-based approach for evaluating the predictiveness of continuous markers in case-control studies.

Y Huang1, M S Pepe.   

Abstract

The predictiveness curve shows the population distribution of risk endowed by a marker or risk prediction model. It provides a means for assessing the model's capacity for stratifying the population according to risk. Methods for making inference about the predictiveness curve have been developed using cross-sectional or cohort data. Here we consider inference based on case-control studies, which are far more common in practice. We investigate the relationship between the ROC curve and the predictiveness curve. Insights about their relationship provide alternative ROC interpretations for the predictiveness curve and for a previously proposed summary index of it. Next the relationship motivates ROC based methods for estimating the predictiveness curve. An important advantage of these methods over previously proposed methods is that they are rank invariant. In addition they provide a way of combining information across populations that have similar ROC curves but varying prevalence of the outcome. We apply the methods to prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a marker for predicting risk of prostate cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19459841      PMCID: PMC2794984          DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2009.01201.x

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


  33 in total

Review 1.  Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer.

Authors:  M S Pepe; R Etzioni; Z Feng; J D Potter; M L Thompson; M Thornquist; M Winget; Y Yasui
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-07-18       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology.

Authors:  Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  The analysis of placement values for evaluating discriminatory measures.

Authors:  Margaret Sullivan Pepe; Tianxi Cai
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Analyzing a portion of the ROC curve.

Authors:  D K McClish
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1989 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Integrating the predictiveness of a marker with its performance as a classifier.

Authors:  Margaret S Pepe; Ziding Feng; Ying Huang; Gary Longton; Ross Prentice; Ian M Thompson; Yingye Zheng
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-11-02       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Matching in studies of classification accuracy: implications for analysis, efficiency, and assessment of incremental value.

Authors:  Holly Janes; Margaret S Pepe
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-05-14       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Index for rating diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W J YOUDEN
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1950-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  On the statistical analysis of ROC curves.

Authors:  M L Thompson; W Zucchini
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 2.373

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.  Pivotal evaluation of the accuracy of a biomarker used for classification or prediction: standards for study design.

Authors:  Margaret S Pepe; Ziding Feng; Holly Janes; Patrick M Bossuyt; John D Potter
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-10-07       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  20 in total

1.  Comparing biomarkers as principal surrogate endpoints.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Assessing risk prediction models in case-control studies using semiparametric and nonparametric methods.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Margaret Sullivan Pepe
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS WITH STANDARDIZED MARKERS.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Margaret S Pepe; Ziding Feng
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2013-09-01       Impact factor: 2.083

4.  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

5.  Evaluating health risk models.

Authors:  Alice S Whittemore
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Semiparametric methods for evaluating risk prediction markers in case-control studies.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Margaret Sullivan Pepe
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 2.445

7.  Estimating the Area Under ROC Curve When the Fitted Binormal Curves Demonstrate Improper Shape.

Authors:  Andriy I Bandos; Ben Guo; David Gur
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Testing for improvement in prediction model performance.

Authors:  Margaret Sullivan Pepe; Kathleen F Kerr; Gary Longton; Zheyu Wang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Performance of reclassification statistics in comparing risk prediction models.

Authors:  Nancy R Cook; Nina P Paynter
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 2.207

10.  Informativeness of Diagnostic Marker Values and the Impact of Data Grouping.

Authors:  Hua Ma; Andriy I Bandos; David Gur
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 1.681

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.