Literature DB >> 22150576

Evaluating prognostic accuracy of biomarkers under competing risk.

Yingye Zheng1, Tianxi Cai, Yuying Jin, Ziding Feng.   

Abstract

To develop more targeted intervention strategies, an important research goal is to identify markers predictive of clinical events. A crucial step toward this goal is to characterize the clinical performance of a marker for predicting different types of events. In this article, we present statistical methods for evaluating the performance of a prognostic marker in predicting multiple competing events. To capture the potential time-varying predictive performance of the marker and incorporate competing risks, we define time- and cause-specific accuracy summaries by stratifying cases based on causes of failure. Such definition would allow one to evaluate the predictive accuracy of a marker for each type of event and compare its predictiveness across event types. Extending the nonparametric crude cause-specific receiver operating characteristics curve estimators by Saha and Heagerty (2010), we develop inference procedures for a range of cause-specific accuracy summaries. To estimate the accuracy measures and assess how covariates may affect the accuracy of a marker under the competing risk setting, we consider two forms of semiparametric models through the cause-specific hazard framework. These approaches enable a flexible modeling of the relationships between the marker and failure times for each cause, while efficiently accommodating additional covariates. We investigate the asymptotic property of the proposed accuracy estimators and demonstrate the finite sample performance of these estimators through simulation studies. The proposed procedures are illustrated with data from a prostate cancer prognostic study.
© 2011, The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22150576      PMCID: PMC3694786          DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01671.x

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


  16 in total

1.  Regression modeling of competing crude failure probabilities.

Authors:  J P Fine
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  Survival model predictive accuracy and ROC curves.

Authors:  Patrick J Heagerty; Yingye Zheng
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  The sensitivity and specificity of markers for event times.

Authors:  Tianxi Cai; Margaret Sullivan Pepe; Yingye Zheng; Thomas Lumley; Nancy Swords Jenny
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2005-08-03       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  ROC analysis with multiple classes and multiple tests: methodology and its application in microarray studies.

Authors:  Jialiang Li; Jason P Fine
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2008-02-27       Impact factor: 5.899

5.  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

6.  Prediction of cumulative incidence function under the proportional hazards model.

Authors:  S C Cheng; J P Fine; L J Wei
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  The analysis of failure times in the presence of competing risks.

Authors:  R L Prentice; J D Kalbfleisch; A V Peterson; N Flournoy; V T Farewell; N E Breslow
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1978-12       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Semiparametric models of time-dependent predictive values of prognostic biomarkers.

Authors:  Yingye Zheng; Tianxi Cai; Janet L Stanford; Ziding Feng
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-04-13       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Time-dependent Predictive Values of Prognostic Biomarkers with Failure Time Outcome.

Authors:  Yingye Zheng; Tianxi Cai; Margaret S Pepe; Wayne C Levy
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 5.033

10.  Prospective accuracy for longitudinal markers.

Authors:  Yingye Zheng; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.571

View more
  10 in total

1.  A direct method to evaluate the time-dependent predictive accuracy for biomarkers.

Authors:  Weining Shen; Jing Ning; Ying Yuan
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2015-03-10       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Evaluation of competing risks prediction models using polytomous discrimination index.

Authors:  Maomao Ding; Jing Ning; Ruosha Li
Journal:  Can J Stat       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 0.758

3.  Should modest elevations in prostate-specific antigen, International Prostate Symptom Score, or their rates of increase over time be used as surrogate measures of incident benign prostatic hyperplasia?

Authors:  Jeannette M Schenk; Rachel Hunter-Merrill; Yingye Zheng; Ruth Etzioni; Roman Gulati; Catherine Tangen; Ian M Thompson; Alan R Kristal
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-06-28       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Concordance for prognostic models with competing risks.

Authors:  Marcel Wolbers; Paul Blanche; Michael T Koller; Jacqueline C M Witteman; Thomas A Gerds
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2014-02-02       Impact factor: 5.899

5.  Group sequential testing of the predictive accuracy of a continuous biomarker with unknown prevalence.

Authors:  Joseph S Koopmeiners; Ziding Feng
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  A modified risk set approach to biomarker evaluation studies.

Authors:  Debashis Ghosh
Journal:  Stat Biosci       Date:  2016-08-22

7.  Statistics and measurable residual disease (MRD) testing: uses and abuses in hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Authors:  Megan Othus; Robert Peter Gale; Christopher S Hourigan; Roland B Walter
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 5.483

8.  Validation of discrete time-to-event prediction models in the presence of competing risks.

Authors:  Rachel Heyard; Jean-François Timsit; Leonhard Held
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 2.207

9.  Criteria for evaluating risk prediction of multiple outcomes.

Authors:  Frank Dudbridge
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 3.021

10.  Inference about time-dependent prognostic accuracy measures in the presence of competing risks.

Authors:  Rajib Dey; Giada Sebastiani; Paramita Saha-Chaudhuri
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-08-28       Impact factor: 4.615

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.