Literature DB >> 23494768

Landmark risk prediction of residual life for breast cancer survival.

Layla Parast1, Tianxi Cai.   

Abstract

The importance of developing personalized risk prediction estimates has become increasingly evident in recent years. In general, patient populations may be heterogenous and represent a mixture of different unknown subtypes of disease. When the source of this heterogeneity and resulting subtypes of disease are unknown, accurate prediction of survival may be difficult. However, in certain disease settings, the onset time of an observable short-term event may be highly associated with these unknown subtypes of disease and thus may be useful in predicting long-term survival. One approach to incorporate short-term event information along with baseline markers for the prediction of long-term survival is through a landmark Cox model, which assumes a proportional hazards model for the residual life at a given landmark point. In this paper, we use this modeling framework to develop procedures to assess how a patient's long-term survival trajectory may change over time given good short-term outcome indications along with prognosis on the basis of baseline markers. We first propose time-varying accuracy measures to quantify the predictive performance of landmark prediction rules for residual life and provide resampling-based procedures to make inference about such accuracy measures. Simulation studies show that the proposed procedures perform well in finite samples. Throughout, we illustrate our proposed procedures by using a breast cancer dataset with information on time to metastasis and time to death. In addition to baseline clinical markers available for each patient, a chromosome instability genetic score, denoted by CIN25, is also available for each patient and has been shown to be predictive of survival for various types of cancer. We provide procedures to evaluate the incremental value of CIN25 for the prediction of residual life and examine how the residual life profile changes over time. This allows us to identify an informative landmark point, t(0) , such that accurate risk predictions of the residual life could be made for patients who survive past t(0) without metastasis.
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomarkers; disease prognosis; landmark prediction; predictive accuracy; risk prediction; survival analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23494768      PMCID: PMC3744612          DOI: 10.1002/sim.5776

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  32 in total

1.  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

2.  Robust combination of multiple diagnostic tests for classifying censored event times.

Authors:  T Cai; S Cheng
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 5.899

Review 3.  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

Review 4.  Frailty models for survival data.

Authors:  P Hougaard
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.588

5.  Inferences on the association parameter in copula models for bivariate survival data.

Authors:  J H Shih; T A Louis
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  A signature of chromosomal instability inferred from gene expression profiles predicts clinical outcome in multiple human cancers.

Authors:  Scott L Carter; Aron C Eklund; Isaac S Kohane; Lyndsay N Harris; Zoltan Szallasi
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2006-08-20       Impact factor: 38.330

7.  Estimation and prediction in a multi-state model for breast cancer.

Authors:  Hein Putter; Jos van der Hage; Geertruida H de Bock; Rachid Elgalta; Cornelis J H van de Velde
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.207

8.  Severity of chronic graft-versus-host disease: association with treatment-related mortality and relapse.

Authors:  Stephanie J Lee; John P Klein; A John Barrett; Olle Ringden; Joseph H Antin; Jean-Yves Cahn; Matthew H Carabasi; Robert Peter Gale; Sergio Giralt; Gregory A Hale; Osman Ilhan; Philip L McCarthy; Gerard Socie; Leo F Verdonck; Daniel J Weisdorf; Mary M Horowitz
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2002-07-15       Impact factor: 22.113

9.  Dynamic predicting by landmarking as an alternative for multi-state modeling: an application to acute lymphoid leukemia data.

Authors:  Hans C van Houwelingen; Hein Putter
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2008-10-03       Impact factor: 1.588

10.  Prediction of the long-term survival in breast cancer patients according to the present oncological status.

Authors:  Laurence Hatteville; Cédric Mahe; Catherine Hill
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Turning the headlights on novel cancer biomarkers: Inspection of mechanics underlying intratumor heterogeneity.

Authors:  Michelle McBride; Padmashree C G Rida; Ritu Aneja
Journal:  Mol Aspects Med       Date:  2015-05-27

2.  Assessing the value of a censored surrogate outcome.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Lu Tian; Tianxi Cai
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 1.588

3.  Dynamic prediction of repeated events data based on landmarking model: application to colorectal liver metastases data.

Authors:  Isao Yokota; Yutaka Matsuyama
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Dynamic risk prediction for diabetes using biomarker change measurements.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Megan Mathews; Mark W Friedberg
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 5.  Harnessing repeated measurements of predictor variables for clinical risk prediction: a review of existing methods.

Authors:  Lucy M Bull; Mark Lunt; Glen P Martin; Kimme Hyrich; Jamie C Sergeant
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2020-07-09
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.