View Item 

Show simple item record

Updating risk prediction tools: A case study in prostate cancer

dc.contributor.authorAnkerst, Donna P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKoniarski, Timen_US
dc.contributor.authorLiang, Yuanyuanen_US
dc.contributor.authorLeach, Robin J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFeng, Zidingen_US
dc.contributor.authorSanda, Martin G.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPartin, Alan W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChan, Daniel W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKagan, Jacoben_US
dc.contributor.authorSokoll, Lorien_US
dc.contributor.authorWei, John T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorThompson, Ian M.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-03-16T16:00:19Z
dc.date.available2013-03-04T15:29:55Zen_US
dc.date.issued2012-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationAnkerst, Donna P.; Koniarski, Tim; Liang, Yuanyuan; Leach, Robin J.; Feng, Ziding; Sanda, Martin G.; Partin, Alan W.; Chan, Daniel W.; Kagan, Jacob; Sokoll, Lori; Wei, John T.; Thompson, Ian M. (2012). "Updating risk prediction tools: A case study in prostate cancer." Biometrical Journal 54(1): 127-142. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90338>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0323-3847en_US
dc.identifier.issn1521-4036en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/90338
dc.description.abstractOnline risk prediction tools for common cancers are now easily accessible and widely used by patients and doctors for informed decision‐making concerning screening and diagnosis. A practical problem is as cancer research moves forward and new biomarkers and risk factors are discovered, there is a need to update the risk algorithms to include them. Typically, the new markers and risk factors cannot be retrospectively measured on the same study participants used to develop the original prediction tool, necessitating the merging of a separate study of different participants, which may be much smaller in sample size and of a different design. Validation of the updated tool on a third independent data set is warranted before the updated tool can go online. This article reports on the application of Bayes rule for updating risk prediction tools to include a set of biomarkers measured in an external study to the original study used to develop the risk prediction tool. The procedure is illustrated in the context of updating the online Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator to incorporate the new markers %freePSA and [‐2]proPSA measured on an external case–control study performed in Texas, U.S.. Recent state‐of‐the art methods in validation of risk prediction tools and evaluation of the improvement of updated to original tools are implemented using an external validation set provided by the U.S. Early Detection Research Network.en_US
dc.publisherWILEY‐VCH Verlagen_US
dc.subject.otherCalibrationen_US
dc.subject.otherDiscriminationen_US
dc.subject.otherProstate Cancer Prevention Trialen_US
dc.subject.otherRisk Predictionen_US
dc.subject.otherValidationen_US
dc.subject.otherNet Benefiten_US
dc.titleUpdating risk prediction tools: A case study in prostate canceren_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPhysicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelBiological Chemistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherPhone: +49‐89‐289‐17443, Fax: +49‐89‐289‐17435en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartments of Pathology and Urology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, MD, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Urology, Harvard Medical School, and Prostate Center, Urology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline MA 02215, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherProgram in Biostatistics and Biomathematics, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N, PO Box 19024, Seattle, WA 98109, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInternational Real Estate Business School, University of Regensburg, 93040 Regensburg, Germanyen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Epidemiology/Biostatistics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio (UTHSCSA), 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., San Antonio, TX, USA 78229, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio (UTHSCSA), 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., San Antonio, TX, USA 78229, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherCancer Biomarkers Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Mathematics, Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Unit M4, Boltzmannstr 3, 85748 Garching b. Munich, Germanyen_US
dc.identifier.pmid22095849en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90338/1/127_ftp.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/bimj.201100062en_US
dc.identifier.sourceBiometrical Journalen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceParekh, D. J., Ankerst, D. P., Higgins, B. A., Hernandez, J., Canby‐Hagino, E., Brand, T., Troyer, D., Leach, R. and Thompson, I. M. ( 2006 ). External validation of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator. Urology 68, 1152 – 1155.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnkerst, D. P., Groskopf, J., Day, J. R., Blase, A., Rittenhouse, H., Pollock, B. H., Tangen, C., Parekh, D., Leach, R. J. and Thompson, I. ( 2008 ). Predicting prostate cancer risk through incorporation of prostate cancer gene 3. Journal of Urology 180, 1303 – 1308.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnscombe, F. J. ( 1967 ) Topics in the investigation of linear relations fitted by the method of least squares (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 29, 1 – 52.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChatfield, C. ( 1995 ). Model uncertainty, data mining, and statistical inference (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 158, 419 – 466.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M. and Clarke‐Pearson, D. L. ( 1988 ). Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44, 837 – 845.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEyre, S. J., Ankerst, D. P., Wei, J. T., Nair, P. V., Regan, M. M., Bueti, G., Tang, J., Rubin, M. A., Kearney, M., Thompson, I. M. and Sanda, M. G. ( 2009 ). Validation in a multiple urology practice setting of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial calculator for predicting prostate cancer detection. Journal of Urology 182, 2653 – 2658.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrühwirth‐Schnatter, S. and Pyne, S. ( 2010 ). Bayesian interface for finite mixtures of univariate and multivariate skew‐normal and skew‐t distributions. Biostatistics 11, 317 – 336.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGail, M. H., Brinton, L. A., Byar, D. P., Corle, D. K., Green, S. B., Schairer, C. and Mulvihill, J. J. ( 1989 ). Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 81, 1879 – 1886.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGail, M. H., Costantino, J. P., Pee, D., Bondy, M., Newman, L., Selvan, M., Anderson, G. L., Malone, K. E., Marchbanks, P. A., McCaskill‐Stevens, W., Norman, S. A., Simon, M. S., Spirtas, R., Usin, G. and Bernstein, L. ( 2007 ). Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 99, 1782 – 1792.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreenland, S. ( 2008 ). The need for reorientation toward cost‐effective prediction: comments on ‘Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond’ by M. J. et al., Statistics in Medicine. Statistics in Medicine 27, 199 – 206.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrundy, S. M., Cleeman, J. I., Merz, C. N. B., Brewer, B. Jr., Clark, L. T., Hunninghake, D. B., Pasternak, R. C., Smith, S. C. and Stone, N. J. for the Coordinating Committee of the National Cholesterol Education Program ( 2004 ). Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines. Circulation 110, 227 – 239.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGu, W. and Pepe, M. S. ( 2009 ). Estimating the capacity for improvement in risk prediction with a marker. Biostatistics 10, 172 – 186.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGu, W. and Pepe, M. S. ( 2011 ). Estimating the diagnostic likelihood ratio of a continuous marker. Biostatistics 12, 87 – 101.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHernandez, D. J., Han, M., Humphreys, E. B., Mangold, L. A., Taneja, S. S., Childs, S. J., Bartsch, G. and Partin, A. W. ( 2009 ). Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy: comparison of a novel logistic regression‐based model, the prostate cancer risk calculator, and prostate‐specific antigen level alone. British Journal Urology International 103, 609 – 614.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIzenman, A. J. ( 2008 ). Modern Multivariate Statistical Techniques. Springer, New York.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJanssen, K. J. M., Donders, A. R. T., Harrell, F. E. Jr., Vergouwe, Y., Chen, Q., Grobbee, D. E. and Moons, K. G. M. ( 2010 ). Missing covariate data in medical research: To impute is better than to ignore. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 63, 721 – 727.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJanssens, A. C. J. W., Deng, Y., Borsboom, G. J. J. M., Eijkemans, M. J. C., Habbema, J. D. F. and Steyerberg, E. W. ( 2005 ). A new logistic regression approach for the evaluation of diagnostic test results. Medical Decision Making 25, 168 – 177.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLemeshow, S. and Hosmer, D. W. Jr., ( 1982 ). A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. American Journal of Epidemiology 115, 92 – 106.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLiang, Y., Ankerst, D. P., Ketchum, N. S., Ercole, B., Shah, G., Shaughnessy, J. D. Jr., Leach, R. J. and Thompson, I. M. ( 2011 ). Prospective evaluation of operating characteristics of prostate cancer detection biomarkers. Journal of Urology 185, 104 – 110.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNguyen, C. T., Yu, C., Moussa A., Kattan, M. W. and Jones, J. S. ( 2010 ). Performance of prostate cancer prevention trial risk calculator in a contemporary cohort screened for prostate cancer and diagnosed by extended prostate biopsy. Journal of Urology 183, 529 – 533.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePencina, M. J., D'Agostino Sr., R. B., D'Agostino Jr., R. B., Vasan, R. S. ( 2008 ). Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Statistics in Medicine 27, 157 – 172.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePepe, M. S., Etzioni, R., Feng, Z., Potter, J. D., Thompson, M. L., Thornquist, M., Winget, M. and Yasui, Y. ( 2001 ). Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 93, 1054 – 1061.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSkates, S. J., Pauler, D. K. and Jacobs, I. J. ( 2001 ). Screening based on the risk of cancer calculation from Bayesian hierarchical change‐point models of longitudinal markers. Journal of the American Statistical Association 96, 429 – 439.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSokoll, L. J., Sanda, M. G., Feng, Z., Kagan, J., Mizrahi, I. A., Broyles, D. L., Partin, A. W., Srivasta, S., Thompson, I. M., Wei, J. T., Zhang, Z. and Chan, D. W. ( 2010 ). A prospective, multicenter National Cancer Institute Early Detection Research Network study of [‐2]proPSA: improving prostate cancer detection and correlating with cancer aggressiveness. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention 19, 1193 – 1200.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteyerberg, E. W. and Vickers, A. J. ( 2008 ). Decision curve analysis: a discussion. Medical Decision Making 28, 146 – 149.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Cook, N. R., Gerds, T., Gonen, M., Obuchowski, N., Pencina, M. J. and Kattan, M. W. ( 2010 ). Assessing the performance of prediction models, a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology 21, 128 – 138.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteyerberg, E. W. ( 2010 ). Clinical Prediction Models. Springer, New York.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThompson, I. M., Ankerst, D. P., Chi, C., Lucia, M. S., Goodman, P., Crowley, J. J., Parnes, H. L. and Coltman Jr., C. A. ( 2005 ). The operating characteristics of prostate‐specific antigen in a population with initial PSA of 3. 0 ng/mL or lower. Journal of the American Medical Association 294, 66 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThompson, I. M., Ankerst, D. P., Chi, C., Goodman, P. J., Tangen, C. M., Lucia, M. S., Feng, Z., Parnes, H. L. and Coltman Jr., C. A. ( 2006 ). Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 98, 529 – 534.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencevan Buuren, S. ( 2007 ). Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 16, 219 – 242.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVickers, A. J. and Elkin, E. B. ( 2006 ). Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Medical Decision Making 26, 565 – 574.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWolf, A. M. D., Wender, R. C., Etzioni, R., Thompson, I. M., D'Amico, A. V., Volk, R. J., Brooks, D. D., Dash, C., Guessous, I., Andrews, K., DeSantis, C. and Smith, R. A. ( 2010 ). American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians 60, 70 – 98.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYates, J. F. ( 1982 ). External correspondence: decomposition of the mean probability score. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 30, 132 – 156en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
127_ftp.pdf
Size:
245.4KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.