Literature DB >> 29025299

Simple Decision-Analytic Functions of the AUC for Ruling Out a Risk Prediction Model and an Added Predictor.

Stuart G Baker1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: When using risk prediction models, an important consideration is weighing performance against the cost (monetary and harms) of ascertaining predictors.
METHODS: The minimum test tradeoff (MTT) for ruling out a model is the minimum number of all-predictor ascertainments per correct prediction to yield a positive overall expected utility. The MTT for ruling out an added predictor is the minimum number of added-predictor ascertainments per correct prediction to yield a positive overall expected utility.
RESULTS: An approximation to the MTT for ruling out a model is 1/[P (H(AUCmodel)], where H(AUC) = AUC - {½ (1-AUC)}½, AUC is the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and P is the probability of the predicted event in the target population. An approximation to the MTT for ruling out an added predictor is 1 /[P {(H(AUCModel:2) - H(AUCModel:1 )], where Model 2 includes an added predictor relative to Model 1. LIMITATION: The latter approximation requires the Tangent Condition that the true positive rate at the point on the ROC curve with a slope of 1 is larger for Model 2 than Model 1.
CONCLUSION: These approximations are suitable for back-of-the-envelope calculations. For example, in a study predicting the risk of invasive breast cancer, Model 2 adds to the predictors in Model 1 a set of 7 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Based on the AUCs and the Tangent Condition, an MTT of 7200 was computed, which indicates that 7200 sets of SNPs are needed for every correct prediction of breast cancer to yield a positive overall expected utility. If ascertaining the SNPs costs $500, this MTT suggests that SNP ascertainment is not likely worthwhile for this risk prediction.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AUC; ROC curve; decision analysis; net benefit; relative utility; risk prediction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29025299      PMCID: PMC5920780          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17732994

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  14 in total

1.  Basic principles of ROC analysis.

Authors:  C E Metz
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  1978-10       Impact factor: 4.446

2.  Evaluating a new marker for risk prediction using the test tradeoff: an update.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker; Ben Van Calster; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 0.968

3.  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 4.  Assessment of claims of improved prediction beyond the Framingham risk score.

Authors:  Ioanna Tzoulaki; George Liberopoulos; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  The threshold approach to clinical decision making.

Authors:  S G Pauker; J P Kassirer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1980-05-15       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  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

Review 7.  The NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) trial.

Authors:  Victor G Vogel
Journal:  Expert Rev Anticancer Ther       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 4.512

8.  Using relative utility curves to evaluate risk prediction.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker; Nancy R Cook; Andrew Vickers; Barnett S Kramer
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 2.483

Review 9.  Net reclassification indices for evaluating risk prediction instruments: a critical review.

Authors:  Kathleen F Kerr; Zheyu Wang; Holly Janes; Robyn L McClelland; Bruce M Psaty; Margaret S Pepe
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.822

10.  Assessment of clinical validity of a breast cancer risk model combining genetic and clinical information.

Authors:  Matthew E Mealiffe; Renee P Stokowski; Brian K Rhees; Ross L Prentice; Mary Pettinger; David A Hinds
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-10-18       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  1 in total

1.  Metrics for Evaluating Polygenic Risk Scores.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker
Journal:  JNCI Cancer Spectr       Date:  2020-12-23
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.