Literature DB >> 20160267

The potential of genes and other markers to inform about risk.

Margaret S Pepe1, Jessie W Gu, Daryl E Morris.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Advances in biotechnology have raised expectations that biomarkers, including genetic profiles, will yield information to accurately predict outcomes for individuals. However, results to date have been disappointing. In addition, statistical methods to quantify the predictive information in markers have not been standardized.
METHODS: We discuss statistical techniques to summarize predictive information, including risk distribution curves and measures derived from them, that relate to decision making. Attributes of these measures are contrasted with alternatives such as receiver operating characteristic curves, R(2), percent reclassification, and net reclassification index. Data are generated from simple models of risk conferred by genetic profiles for individuals in a population. Statistical techniques are illustrated, and the risk prediction capacities of different risk models are quantified.
RESULTS: Risk distribution curves are most informative and relevant to clinical practice. They show proportions of subjects classified into clinically relevant risk categories. In a population in which 10% have the outcome event and subjects are categorized as high risk if their risk exceeds 20%, we identified some settings where more than half of those destined to have an event were classified as high risk by the risk model. Either 150 genes each with odds ratio of 1.5 or 250 genes each with odds ratio of 1.25 were required when the minor allele frequencies are 10%. We show that conclusions based on receiver operating characteristic curves may not be the same as conclusions based on risk distribution curves.
CONCLUSIONS: Many highly predictive genes will be required to identify substantial numbers of subjects at high risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20160267      PMCID: PMC2836397          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0510

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  14 in total

1.  Comments on 'Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: From area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond' by M. J. Pencina et al., Statistics in Medicine (DOI: 10.1002/sim.2929).

Authors:  M S Pepe; Z Feng; J W Gu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-01-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  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

3.  Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-01-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Assessing new biomarkers and predictive models for use in clinical practice: a clinician's guide.

Authors:  Kevin McGeechan; Petra Macaskill; Les Irwig; Gerald Liew; Tien Y Wong
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-11-24

5.  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

6.  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

7.  Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Elena B Elkin
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

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

Authors:  Y Huang; M S Pepe
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Assessing the value of risk predictions by using risk stratification tables.

Authors:  Holly Janes; Margaret S Pepe; Wen Gu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Evaluating new cardiovascular risk factors for risk stratification.

Authors:  Ralph H Stern
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.738

View more
  20 in total

1.  Analytical and simulation methods for estimating the potential predictive ability of genetic profiling: a comparison of methods and results.

Authors:  Suman Kundu; Lennart C Karssen; A Cecile J W Janssens
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 2.  Inherited genetic susceptibility to multiple myeloma.

Authors:  G J Morgan; D C Johnson; N Weinhold; H Goldschmidt; O Landgren; H T Lynch; K Hemminki; R S Houlston
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 11.528

3.  Genetic risk models: Influence of model size on risk estimates and precision.

Authors:  Ying Shan; Gerard Tromp; Helena Kuivaniemi; Diane T Smelser; Shefali S Verma; Marylyn D Ritchie; James R Elmore; David J Carey; Yvette P Conley; Michael B Gorin; Daniel E Weeks
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 2.135

4.  Problems with risk reclassification methods for evaluating prediction models.

Authors:  Margaret S Pepe
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-05-09       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Invited commentary: the importance of prevalence in the effectiveness of a (bio)marker.

Authors:  Arpita Ghosh; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Evaluating health risk models.

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

Review 7.  Genetics and the individualized prediction of fracture.

Authors:  Tuan V Nguyen; John A Eisman
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 5.096

Review 8.  Genetics of osteoporosis from genome-wide association studies: advances and challenges.

Authors:  J Brent Richards; Hou-Feng Zheng; Tim D Spector
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  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

Review 10.  Genetic profiling and individualized assessment of fracture risk.

Authors:  Tuan V Nguyen; John A Eisman
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 43.330

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.