Literature DB >> 27893925

A risk-based measure of time-varying prognostic discrimination for survival models.

C Jason Liang1, Patrick J Heagerty1.   

Abstract

Prognostic survival models are commonly evaluated in terms of both their calibration and their discrimination. Comparing observed and predicted survival curves can assess calibration, while discrimination is typically summarized through comparison of the properties of cases or subjects who experience an event, and the properties of controls represented by event-free individuals. For binary data, discrimination is characterized either by using the relative ranks of cases and controls and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, or by summarizing the magnitude of risk placed on cases and controls through calculation of the discrimination slope (DS). In this article, we propose a risk-based measure of time-varying discrimination that generalizes the discrimination slope to allow use with incident events and hazard models. We refer to the new measure as the hazard discrimination summary (HDS) since it compares the relative risk among incident cases to their associated dynamic risk set controls. We introduce both a model-based estimation procedure that adopts the Cox model, and an alternative approach that locally relaxes the proportional hazards assumption. We illustrate the proposed methods using both a benchmark survival data set, and an oncology study where primary interest is in the time-varying performance of candidate biomarkers.
© 2016, The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomarkers; Cox regression; Discrimination; Longitudinal analysis; Predictive accuracy; Survival

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27893925      PMCID: PMC5466878          DOI: 10.1111/biom.12628

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


  13 in total

1.  Several methods to assess improvement in risk prediction models: extension to survival analysis.

Authors:  Lloyd E Chambless; Christopher P Cummiskey; Gang Cui
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Philip Greenland; Joseph S Alpert; George A Beller; Emelia J Benjamin; Matthew J Budoff; Zahi A Fayad; Elyse Foster; Mark A Hlatky; John McB Hodgson; Frederick G Kushner; Michael S Lauer; Leslee J Shaw; Sidney C Smith; Allen J Taylor; William S Weintraub; Nanette K Wenger; Alice K Jacobs; Sidney C Smith; Jeffrey L Anderson; Nancy Albert; Christopher E Buller; Mark A Creager; Steven M Ettinger; Robert A Guyton; Jonathan L Halperin; Judith S Hochman; Frederick G Kushner; Rick Nishimura; E Magnus Ohman; Richard L Page; William G Stevenson; Lynn G Tarkington; Clyde W Yancy
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-12-14       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Survival model predictive accuracy and ROC curves.

Authors:  Patrick J Heagerty; Yingye Zheng
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  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

5.  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

6.  Prognosis in primary biliary cirrhosis: model for decision making.

Authors:  E R Dickson; P M Grambsch; T R Fleming; L D Fisher; A Langworthy
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 17.425

7.  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

8.  Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures.

Authors:  Ewout W Steyerberg; Andrew J Vickers; Nancy R Cook; Thomas Gerds; Mithat Gonen; Nancy Obuchowski; Michael J Pencina; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.822

9.  2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Criteria for evaluation of novel markers of cardiovascular risk: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Mark A Hlatky; Philip Greenland; Donna K Arnett; Christie M Ballantyne; Michael H Criqui; Mitchell S V Elkind; Alan S Go; Frank E Harrell; Yuling Hong; Barbara V Howard; Virginia J Howard; Priscilla Y Hsue; Christopher M Kramer; Joseph P McConnell; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Christopher J O'Donnell; Sidney C Smith; Peter W F Wilson
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-04-13       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  A Tutorial on Evaluating the Time-Varying Discrimination Accuracy of Survival Models Used in Dynamic Decision Making.

Authors:  Aasthaa Bansal; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-10-14       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Development of New Equations Predicting the Mortality Risk of Patients on Continuous RRT.

Authors:  Min Woo Kang; Navdeep Tangri; Soie Kwon; Lilin Li; Hyeseung Lee; Seung Seok Han; Jung Nam An; Jeonghwan Lee; Dong Ki Kim; Chun Soo Lim; Yon Su Kim; Sejoong Kim; Jung Pyo Lee
Journal:  Kidney360       Date:  2022-08-02

3.  A comparison of landmark methods and time-dependent ROC methods to evaluate the time-varying performance of prognostic markers for survival outcomes.

Authors:  Aasthaa Bansal; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2019-07-25

4.  Derivation and Validation of a Prognostic Scoring Model Based on Clinical and Pathological Features for Risk Stratification in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Jiaying Zhou; Huan Li; Bin Cheng; Ruoyan Cao; Fengyuan Zou; Dong Yang; Xiang Liu; Ming Song; Tong Wu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 6.244

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.