Literature DB >> 30319014

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

Aasthaa Bansal1,2, Patrick J Heagerty1,2.   

Abstract

Many medical decisions involve the use of dynamic information collected on individual patients toward predicting likely transitions in their future health status. If accurate predictions are developed, then a prognostic model can identify patients at greatest risk for future adverse events and may be used clinically to define populations appropriate for targeted intervention. In practice, a prognostic model is often used to guide decisions at multiple time points over the course of disease, and classification performance (i.e., sensitivity and specificity) for distinguishing high-risk v. low-risk individuals may vary over time as an individual's disease status and prognostic information change. In this tutorial, we detail contemporary statistical methods that can characterize the time-varying accuracy of prognostic survival models when used for dynamic decision making. Although statistical methods for evaluating prognostic models with simple binary outcomes are well established, methods appropriate for survival outcomes are less well known and require time-dependent extensions of sensitivity and specificity to fully characterize longitudinal biomarkers or models. The methods we review are particularly important in that they allow for appropriate handling of censored outcomes commonly encountered with event time data. We highlight the importance of determining whether clinical interest is in predicting cumulative (or prevalent) cases over a fixed future time interval v. predicting incident cases over a range of follow-up times and whether patient information is static or updated over time. We discuss implementation of time-dependent receiver operating characteristic approaches using relevant R statistical software packages. The statistical summaries are illustrated using a liver prognostic model to guide transplantation in primary biliary cirrhosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dynamic information; prognosis; risk prediction; sensitivity; specificity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30319014      PMCID: PMC6584037          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18801312

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


  37 in total

1.  Time-dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker.

Authors:  P J Heagerty; T Lumley; M S Pepe
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Basic principles of ROC analysis.

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

3.  Bagging survival trees.

Authors:  Torsten Hothorn; Berthold Lausen; Axel Benner; Martin Radespiel-Tröger
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  A Bayesian neural network approach for modelling censored data with an application to prognosis after surgery for breast cancer.

Authors:  P J G Lisboa; H Wong; P Harris; R Swindell
Journal:  Artif Intell Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.326

5.  Survival model predictive accuracy and ROC curves.

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

6.  Boosting proportional hazards models using smoothing splines, with applications to high-dimensional microarray data.

Authors:  Hongzhe Li; Yihui Luan
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-02-15       Impact factor: 6.937

7.  Regularized ROC method for disease classification and biomarker selection with microarray data.

Authors:  Shuangge Ma; Jian Huang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-10-18       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 8.  Development of the allocation system for deceased donor liver transplantation.

Authors:  John M Coombes; James F Trotter
Journal:  Clin Med Res       Date:  2005-05

9.  Is serum bilirubin concentration the only valid prognostic marker in primary biliary cirrhosis?

Authors:  P Krzeski; W Zych; E Kraszewska; B Milewski; E Butruk; A Habior
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 17.425

10.  The Seattle Heart Failure Model: prediction of survival in heart failure.

Authors:  Wayne C Levy; Dariush Mozaffarian; David T Linker; Santosh C Sutradhar; Stefan D Anker; Anne B Cropp; Inder Anand; Aldo Maggioni; Paul Burton; Mark D Sullivan; Bertram Pitt; Philip A Poole-Wilson; Douglas L Mann; Milton Packer
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-03-13       Impact factor: 29.690

View more
  13 in total

1.  Comparison of model fit and discriminatory ability of the 8th edition of the tumor-node-metastasis classification and the 9th edition of the Japanese classification to identify stage III colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Kei Kitamura; Dai Shida; Shigeki Sekine; Yuka Ahiko; Yuya Nakamura; Konosuke Moritani; Shunsuke Tsukamoto; Yukihide Kanemitsu
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Concordance Measures and Time-Dependent ROC Methods.

Authors:  Norberto Pantoja-Galicia; Olivia I Okereke; Deborah Blacker; Rebecca A Betensky
Journal:  Biostat Epidemiol       Date:  2021-05-25

3.  Development and External Validation of a Mortality Prediction Model for Community-Dwelling Older Adults With Dementia.

Authors:  W James Deardorff; Deborah E Barnes; Sun Y Jeon; W John Boscardin; Kenneth M Langa; Kenneth E Covinsky; Susan L Mitchell; Elizabeth L Whitlock; Alexander K Smith; Sei J Lee
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 44.409

4.  A Framework for Using Real-World Data and Health Outcomes Modeling to Evaluate Machine Learning-Based Risk Prediction Models.

Authors:  Patricia J Rodriguez; David L Veenstra; Patrick J Heagerty; Christopher H Goss; Kathleen J Ramos; Aasthaa Bansal
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 5.101

5.  THBS2/CA19-9 Detecting Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma at Diagnosis Underperforms in Prediagnostic Detection: Implications for Biomarker Advancement.

Authors:  Shirsa Udgata; Naomi Takenaka; William R Bamlet; Ann L Oberg; Stephanie S Yee; Erica L Carpenter; Daniel Herman; Jungsun Kim; Gloria M Petersen; Kenneth S Zaret
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2020-10-16

6.  Time-varying discrimination accuracy of longitudinal biomarkers for the prediction of mortality compared to assessment at fixed time point in severe burns patients.

Authors:  Jaechul Yoon; Dohern Kym; Jun Hur; Jae Hee Won; Haejun Yim; Yong Suk Cho; Wook Chun
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2021-01-06

7.  Corneal Confocal Microscopy Predicts the Development of Diabetic Neuropathy: A Longitudinal Diagnostic Multinational Consortium Study.

Authors:  Bruce A Perkins; Leif Erik Lovblom; Evan J H Lewis; Vera Bril; Maryam Ferdousi; Andrej Orszag; Katie Edwards; Nicola Pritchard; Anthony Russell; Cirous Dehghani; Danièle Pacaud; Kenneth Romanchuk; Jean K Mah; Maria Jeziorska; Andrew Marshall; Roni M Shtein; Rodica Pop-Busui; Stephen I Lentz; Mitra Tavakoli; Andrew J M Boulton; Nathan Efron; Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 17.152

8.  GOLD Classifications, COPD Hospitalization, and All-Cause Mortality in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: The HUNT Study.

Authors:  Arnulf Langhammer; Ben Michael Brumpton; Laxmi Bhatta; Linda Leivseth; Xiao-Mei Mai; Anne Hildur Henriksen; David Carslake; Yue Chen
Journal:  Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis       Date:  2020-01-31

9.  Clinical risk prediction with random forests for survival, longitudinal, and multivariate (RF-SLAM) data analysis.

Authors:  Shannon Wongvibulsin; Katherine C Wu; Scott L Zeger
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Baseline and Dynamic Risk Predictors of Appropriate Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy.

Authors:  Katherine C Wu; Shannon Wongvibulsin; Susumu Tao; Hiroshi Ashikaga; Michael Stillabower; Timm M Dickfeld; Joseph E Marine; Robert G Weiss; Gordon F Tomaselli; Scott L Zeger
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 5.501

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.