Literature DB >> 22984361

Evaluating a New Risk Marker's Predictive Contribution in Survival Models.

M Liu1, A S Kapadia, C J Etzel.   

Abstract

Although the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) is the most popular measure of the performance of prediction models, it has limitations, especially when it is used to evaluate the added discrimination of a new risk marker in an existing risk model. Pencina et al. (2008) proposed two indices, the net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), to supplement the improvement in the AUC (IAUC). Their NRI and IDI are based on binary outcomes in case-control settings, which do not involve time-to-event outcome. However, many disease outcomes are time-dependent and the onset time can be censored. Measuring discrimination potential of a prognostic marker without considering time to event can lead to biased estimates. In this paper, we extended the NRI and IDI to time-to-event settings and derived the corresponding sample estimators and asymptotic tests. Simulation studies showed that the time-dependent NRI and IDI have better performance than Pencina's NRI and IDI for measuring the improved discriminatory power of a new risk marker in prognostic survival models.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 22984361      PMCID: PMC3439820          DOI: 10.1080/15598608.2010.10412022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stat Theory Pract        ISSN: 1559-8608


  13 in total

1.  Validation, calibration, revision and combination of prognostic survival models.

Authors:  H C van Houwelingen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-12-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Estimation of time-dependent area under the ROC curve for long-term risk prediction.

Authors:  Lloyd E Chambless; Guoqing Diao
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-10-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  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

4.  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

Review 5.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  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

8.  C-reactive protein and parental history improve global cardiovascular risk prediction: the Reynolds Risk Score for men.

Authors:  Paul M Ridker; Nina P Paynter; Nader Rifai; J Michael Gaziano; Nancy R Cook
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-11-09       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Evaluation of the Framingham risk score in the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer-Norfolk cohort: does adding glycated hemoglobin improve the prediction of coronary heart disease events?

Authors:  Rebecca K Simmons; Stephen Sharp; S Matthijs Boekholdt; Lincoln A Sargeant; Kay-Tee Khaw; Nicholas J Wareham; Simon J Griffin
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-06-09

Review 10.  Critical appraisal of CRP measurement for the prediction of coronary heart disease events: new data and systematic review of 31 prospective cohorts.

Authors:  Tina Shah; Juan P Casas; Jackie A Cooper; Ioanna Tzoulaki; Reecha Sofat; Valerie McCormack; Liam Smeeth; John E Deanfield; Gordon D Lowe; Ann Rumley; F Gerald R Fowkes; Steve E Humphries; Aroon D Hingorani
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2008-10-17       Impact factor: 7.196

View more
  4 in total

1.  EVALUATING RISK-PREDICTION MODELS USING DATA FROM ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS.

Authors:  L E Wang; Pamela A Shaw; Hansie M Mathelier; Stephen E Kimmel; Benjamin French
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.083

2.  A risk model for lung cancer incidence.

Authors:  Clive Hoggart; Paul Brennan; Anne Tjonneland; Ulla Vogel; Kim Overvad; Jane Nautrup Østergaard; Rudolf Kaaks; Federico Canzian; Heiner Boeing; Annika Steffen; Antonia Trichopoulou; Christina Bamia; Dimitrios Trichopoulos; Mattias Johansson; Domenico Palli; Vittorio Krogh; Rosario Tumino; Carlotta Sacerdote; Salvatore Panico; Hendriek Boshuizen; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Petra H M Peeters; Eiliv Lund; Inger Torhild Gram; Tonje Braaten; Laudina Rodríguez; Antonio Agudo; Emilio Sánchez-Cantalejo; Larraitz Arriola; Maria-Dolores Chirlaque; Aurelio Barricarte; Torgny Rasmuson; Kay-Tee Khaw; Nicholas Wareham; Naomi E Allen; Elio Riboli; Paolo Vineis
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2012-04-11

3.  Predicting prolonged dose titration in patients starting warfarin.

Authors:  Brian S Finkelman; Benjamin French; Luanne Bershaw; Colleen M Brensinger; Michael B Streiff; Andrew E Epstein; Stephen E Kimmel
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Early Identification of Preterm Neonates at Birth With a Tablet App for the Simplified Gestational Age Score (T-SGAS) When Ultrasound Gestational Age Dating Is Unavailable: Protocol for a Validation Study.

Authors:  Archana B Patel; Kunal Kurhe; Amber Prakash; Savita Bhargav; Suchita Parepalli; Elizabeth V Fogleman; Janet L Moore; Dennis D Wallace; Hemant Kulkarni; Patricia L Hibberd
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2019-03-12
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.