Literature DB >> 23765915

Adjustment for measurement error in evaluating diagnostic biomarkers by using an internal reliability sample.

Matthew T White1, Sharon X Xie.   

Abstract

Biomarkers are often measured with error due to imperfect lab conditions or temporal variability within subjects. Using an internal reliability sample of the biomarker, we develop a parametric bias-correction approach for estimating a variety of diagnostic performance measures including sensitivity, specificity, the Youden index with its associated optimal cut-point, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative diagnostic likelihood ratios when the biomarker is subject to measurement error. We derive the asymptotic properties of the proposed likelihood-based estimators and show that they are consistent and asymptotically normally distributed. We propose confidence intervals for these estimators and confidence bands for the receiver operating characteristic curve. We demonstrate through extensive simulations that the proposed approach removes the bias due to measurement error and outperforms the naïve approach (which ignores the measurement error) in both point and interval estimation. We also derive the asymptotic bias of naïve estimates and discuss conditions in which naïve estimates of the diagnostic measures are biased toward estimates produced when the biomarker is ineffective (i.e., when sensitivity equals 1 - specificity) or are anticonservatively biased. The proposed method has broad biomedical applications and is illustrated using a biomarker study in Alzheimer's disease. We recommend collecting an internal reliability sample during the biomarker discovery phase in order to adequately evaluate the performance of biomarkers with careful adjustment for measurement error.
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomarkers; diagnostic measures; maximum likelihood; measurement error; replicate data

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23765915      PMCID: PMC3808490          DOI: 10.1002/sim.5878

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


  18 in total

1.  The effect of random measurement error on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

Authors:  D Faraggi
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Statistical inference for the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in the presence of random measurement error.

Authors:  E F Schisterman; D Faraggi; B Reiser; M Trevisan
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-07-15       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Measurement error and confidence intervals for ROC curves.

Authors:  Tor D Tosteson; John P Buonaccorsi; Eugene Demidenko; Wendy A Wells
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.207

4.  Index for rating diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W J YOUDEN
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1950-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Receiver operating characteristic studies and measurement errors.

Authors:  M Coffin; S Sukhatme
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Confidence bands for receiver operating characteristic curves.

Authors:  G Ma; W J Hall
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1993 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Detection of tau proteins in normal and Alzheimer's disease cerebrospinal fluid with a sensitive sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Authors:  M Vandermeeren; M Mercken; E Vanmechelen; J Six; A van de Voorde; J J Martin; P Cras
Journal:  J Neurochem       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 5.372

8.  Cerebrospinal fluid tau and beta-amyloid: how well do these biomarkers reflect autopsy-confirmed dementia diagnoses?

Authors:  Christopher M Clark; Sharon Xie; Jesse Chittams; Douglas Ewbank; Elaine Peskind; Douglas Galasko; John C Morris; Daniel W McKeel; Martin Farlow; Sharon L Weitlauf; Joseph Quinn; Jeffrey Kaye; David Knopman; Hiroyuki Arai; Rachelle S Doody; Charles DeCarli; Susan Leight; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  2003-12

9.  The topographical and neuroanatomical distribution of neurofibrillary tangles and neuritic plaques in the cerebral cortex of patients with Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  S E Arnold; B T Hyman; J Flory; A R Damasio; G W Van Hoesen
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  1991 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.357

10.  Plasma biomarkers of depressive symptoms in older adults.

Authors:  S E Arnold; S X Xie; Y-Y Leung; L-S Wang; M A Kling; X Han; E J Kim; D A Wolk; D A Bennett; A Chen-Plotkin; M Grossman; W Hu; V M-Y Lee; R Scott Mackin; J Q Trojanowski; R S Wilson; L M Shaw
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2012-01-03       Impact factor: 6.222

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  The use of mass spectrometry for analysing metabolite biomarkers in epidemiology: methodological and statistical considerations for application to large numbers of biological samples.

Authors:  Mads V Lind; Otto I Savolainen; Alastair B Ross
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Evaluation of Cerebrospinal Fluid Assay Variability in Alzheimer's Disease.

Authors:  Matthew T White; Leslie M Shaw; Sharon X Xie
Journal:  J Alzheimers Dis       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 4.472

3.  Methods to adjust for misclassification in the quantiles for the generalized linear model with measurement error in continuous exposures.

Authors:  Ching-Yun Wang; Jean De Dieu Tapsoba; Catherine Duggan; Kristin L Campbell; Anne McTiernan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-11-22       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Correcting AUC for Measurement Error.

Authors:  Bernard Rosner; Shelley Tworoger; Weiliang Qiu
Journal:  J Biom Biostat       Date:  2015-12-28
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.