Literature DB >> 23807695

Adopting nested case-control quota sampling designs for the evaluation of risk markers.

Yingye Zheng1, Tianxi Cai, Margaret S Pepe.   

Abstract

Two-phase study methods, in which more detailed or more expensive exposure information is only collected on a sample of individuals with events and a small proportion of other individuals, are expected to play a critical role in biomarker validation research. One major limitation of standard two-phase designs is that they are most conveniently employed with study cohorts in which information on longitudinal follow-up and other potential matching variables is electronically recorded. However for many practical situations, at the sampling stage such information may not be readily available for every potential candidates. Study eligibility needs to be verified by reviewing information from medical charts one by one. In this manuscript, we study in depth a novel study design commonly undertaken in practice that involves sampling until quotas of eligible cases and controls are identified. We propose semiparametric methods to calculate risk distributions and a wide variety of prediction indices when outcomes are censored failure times and data are collected under the quota sampling design. Consistency and asymptotic normality of our estimators are established using empirical process theory. Simulation results indicate that the proposed procedures perform well in finite samples. Application is made to the evaluation of a new risk model for predicting the onset of cardiovascular disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23807695      PMCID: PMC3903399          DOI: 10.1007/s10985-013-9270-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal        ISSN: 1380-7870            Impact factor:   1.588


  19 in total

Review 1.  Cardiovascular risk prediction: basic concepts, current status, and future directions.

Authors:  Donald M Lloyd-Jones
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  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

3.  Evaluating prognostic accuracy of biomarkers in nested case-control studies.

Authors:  Tianxi Cai; Yingye Zheng
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2011-08-19       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories.

Authors:  P W Wilson; R B D'Agostino; D Levy; A M Belanger; H Silbershatz; W B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1998-05-12       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  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

7.  Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Elena B Elkin
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

8.  A unified inference procedure for a class of measures to assess improvement in risk prediction systems with survival data.

Authors:  Hajime Uno; Lu Tian; Tianxi Cai; Isaac S Kohane; L J Wei
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients.

Authors:  Laurel A Habel; Steven Shak; Marlena K Jacobs; Angela Capra; Claire Alexander; Mylan Pho; Joffre Baker; Michael Walker; Drew Watson; James Hackett; Noelle T Blick; Deborah Greenberg; Louis Fehrenbacher; Bryan Langholz; Charles P Quesenberry
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Pivotal evaluation of the accuracy of a biomarker used for classification or prediction: standards for study design.

Authors:  Margaret S Pepe; Ziding Feng; Holly Janes; Patrick M Bossuyt; John D Potter
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-10-07       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  4 in total

1.  This special issue contains several papers on clinical trials, exemplifying Ross Prentice's influence. Preface.

Authors:  Jianwen Cai; Li Hsu
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 1.588

2.  Prediction of coronary artery disease risk based on multiple longitudinal biomarkers.

Authors:  Lili Yang; Menggang Yu; Sujuan Gao
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Study Design Considerations for Cancer Biomarker Discoveries.

Authors:  Yingye Zheng
Journal:  J Appl Lab Med       Date:  2018-09

4.  iCARE: An R package to build, validate and apply absolute risk models.

Authors:  Parichoy Pal Choudhury; Paige Maas; Amber Wilcox; William Wheeler; Mark Brook; David Check; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Nilanjan Chatterjee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.