ReviewEuropean journal of clinical investigation2012
Better cancer biomarker discovery through better study design.
Review in European journal of clinical investigation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Association between Helicobacter pylori infection and pancreatic cancer development: a meta-analysis.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Joint modeling of longitudinal biomarker and survival outcomes with the presence of competing risk in the nested case-control studies with application to the TEDDY microbiome dataset.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Development of an End-to-End Total RNA Sequencing Quality Control Framework for Blood-Based Biomarker Discovery.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2025Article
- Tropomyosin Isoforms as Biomarkers for Urothelial Bladder Cancer: Promise and Challenges.Cureus · 2025Review
- Article
- A flexible matching strategy for matched nested case-control studies.Annals of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Biomarkers: Promising and valuable tools towards diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of Covid-19 and other diseases.Heliyon · 2023Review
- Methods for Stratification and Validation Cohorts: A Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Residential neighborhood features associated with objectively measured walking near home: Revisiting walkability using the Automatic Context Measurement Tool (ACMT).Health & place · 2020Article
- Nested case-control data analysis using weighted conditional logistic regression in The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study: A novel approach.Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2020Article
- The Search for Clinically Useful Biomarkers of Complex Disease: A Data Analysis Perspective.Metabolites · 2019Article
- Study Design Considerations for Cancer Biomarker Discoveries.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2018Article
- A Critical Evaluation of Wet Biomarkers for Huntington's Disease: Current Status and Ways Forward.Journal of Huntington's disease · 2018Review
- Contextual Correlates of Physical Activity among Older Adults: A Neighborhood Environment-Wide Association Study (NE-WAS).Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2017Article
- A new framework for prediction and variable selection for uncommon events in a large prospective cohort study.Model assisted statistics and applications : an international journal · 2017Article
- The current deconstruction of paradoxes: one sign of the ongoing methodological "revolution".European journal of epidemiology · 2015Article
- Leveraging biospecimen resources for discovery or validation of markers for early cancer detection.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2015Article
- Biomarker discovery study design for type 1 diabetes in The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study.Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-throughput laboratory technologies coupled with sophisticated bioinformatics algorithms have tremendous potential for discovering novel biomarkers, or profiles of biomarkers, that could serve as predictors of disease risk, response to treatment or prognosis. We discuss methodological issues in wedding high-throughput approaches for biomarker discovery with the case-control study designs typically used in biomarker discovery studies, especially focusing on nested case-control designs.
methodsWe review principles for nested case-control study design in relation to biomarker discovery studies and describe how the efficiency of biomarker discovery can be effected by study design choices. We develop a simulated prostate cancer cohort data set and a series of biomarker discovery case-control studies nested within the cohort to illustrate how study design choices can influence biomarker discovery process.
resultCommon elements of nested case-control design, incidence density sampling and matching of controls to cases are not typically factored correctly into biomarker discovery analyses, inducing bias in the discovery process. We illustrate how incidence density sampling and matching of controls to cases reduce the apparent specificity of truly valid biomarkers 'discovered' in a nested case-control study. We also propose and demonstrate a new case-control matching protocol, we call 'antimatching', that improves the efficiency of biomarker discovery studies.
conclusionsFor a valid, but as yet undiscovered, biomarker(s) disjunctions between correctly designed epidemiologic studies and the practice of biomarker discovery reduce the likelihood that true biomarker(s) will be discovered and increases the false-positive discovery rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.