Literature DB >> 22299708

Assessing treatment-selection markers using a potential outcomes framework.

Ying Huang1, Peter B Gilbert, Holly Janes.   

Abstract

Treatment-selection markers are biological molecules or patient characteristics associated with one's response to treatment. They can be used to predict treatment effects for individual subjects and subsequently help deliver treatment to those most likely to benefit from it. Statistical tools are needed to evaluate a marker's capacity to help with treatment selection. The commonly adopted criterion for a good treatment-selection marker has been the interaction between marker and treatment. While a strong interaction is important, it is, however, not sufficient for good marker performance. In this article, we develop novel measures for assessing a continuous treatment-selection marker, based on a potential outcomes framework. Under a set of assumptions, we derive the optimal decision rule based on the marker to classify individuals according to treatment benefit, and characterize the marker's performance using the corresponding classification accuracy as well as the overall distribution of the classifier. We develop a constrained maximum-likelihood method for estimation and testing in a randomized trial setting. Simulation studies are conducted to demonstrate the performance of our methods. Finally, we illustrate the methods using an HIV vaccine trial where we explore the value of the level of preexisting immunity to adenovirus serotype 5 for predicting a vaccine-induced increase in the risk of HIV acquisition.
© 2011, The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22299708      PMCID: PMC3417090          DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01722.x

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


  19 in total

1.  Combining several screening tests: optimality of the risk score.

Authors:  Martin W McIntosh; Margaret Sullivan Pepe
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Adaptive signature design: an adaptive clinical trial design for generating and prospectively testing a gene expression signature for sensitive patients.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Richard Simon
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2005-11-01       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Various randomized designs can be used to evaluate medical tests.

Authors:  Jeroen G Lijmer; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-10-21       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 4.  Statistical issues in translational cancer research.

Authors:  Stephen L George
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers.

Authors:  Richard M Simon; Soonmyung Paik; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 6.  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

Review 7.  American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer.

Authors:  Lyndsay Harris; Herbert Fritsche; Robert Mennel; Larry Norton; Peter Ravdin; Sheila Taube; Mark R Somerfield; Daniel F Hayes; Robert C Bast
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Christos S Karapetis; Shirin Khambata-Ford; Derek J Jonker; Chris J O'Callaghan; Dongsheng Tu; Niall C Tebbutt; R John Simes; Haji Chalchal; Jeremy D Shapiro; Sonia Robitaille; Timothy J Price; Lois Shepherd; Heather-Jane Au; Christiane Langer; Malcolm J Moore; John R Zalcberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Design and inference for cancer biomarker study with an outcome and auxiliary-dependent subsampling.

Authors:  Xiaofei Wang; Haibo Zhou
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 10.  American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: testing for KRAS gene mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy.

Authors:  Carmen J Allegra; J Milburn Jessup; Mark R Somerfield; Stanley R Hamilton; Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Pamela K McAllister; Roscoe F Morton; Richard L Schilsky
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-02-02       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  25 in total

1.  Increasing efficiency for estimating treatment-biomarker interactions with historical data.

Authors:  Philip S Boonstra; Jeremy Mg Taylor; Bhramar Mukherjee
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.021

Review 2.  Personalized evidence based medicine: predictive approaches to heterogeneous treatment effects.

Authors:  David M Kent; Ewout Steyerberg; David van Klaveren
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-12-10

3.  Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, and NPV for Predictive Biomarkers.

Authors:  Richard Simon
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Bridging Efficacy of a Tetravalent Dengue Vaccine from Children/Adolescents to Adults in Highly Endemic Countries Based on Neutralizing Antibody Response.

Authors:  Peter B Gilbert; Ying Huang; Michal Juraska; Zoe Moodie; Youyi Fong; Alexander Luedtke; Yingying Zhuang; Jason Shao; Lindsay N Carpp; Nicholas Jackson; Laurent Chambonneau; Alain Bouckenooghe; Betzana Zambrano; Carina Frago; Sophie Pallardy; Fernando Noriega
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.345

5.  Neutralizing Antibody Correlates Analysis of Tetravalent Dengue Vaccine Efficacy Trials in Asia and Latin America.

Authors:  Zoe Moodie; Michal Juraska; Ying Huang; Yingying Zhuang; Youyi Fong; Lindsay N Carpp; Steven G Self; Laurent Chambonneau; Robert Small; Nicholas Jackson; Fernando Noriega; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  Single index methods for evaluation of marker-guided treatment rules based on multivariate marker panels.

Authors:  Veronika Skrivankova; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  The Fundamental Difficulty With Evaluating the Accuracy of Biomarkers for Guiding Treatment.

Authors:  Holly Janes; Margaret S Pepe; Lisa M McShane; Daniel J Sargent; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Evaluating marker-guided treatment selection strategies.

Authors:  Roland A Matsouaka; Junlong Li; Tianxi Cai
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Validation of the 12-gene Predictive Signature for Adjuvant Chemotherapy Response in Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Yang Xie; Wei Lu; Shidan Wang; Ximing Tang; Hao Tang; Yunyun Zhou; Cesar Moran; Carmen Behrens; Jack A Roth; Qinghua Zhou; David H Johnson; Stephen G Swisher; John V Heymach; Vassiliki A Papadimitrakopoulou; Guanghua Xiao; John D Minna; Ignacio I Wistuba
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 12.531

10.  The Use of Covariates and Random Effects in Evaluating Predictive Biomarkers Under a Potential Outcome Framework.

Authors:  Zhiwei Zhang; Lei Nie; Guoxing Soon; Aiyi Liu
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 2.083

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.