ArticleGenetic epidemiology2015
Prognostic and Predictive Values and Statistical Interactions in the Era of Targeted Treatment.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Melanoma Epidemiology and Sun Exposure.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2020Review
- BioPETsurv: Methodology and open source software to evaluate biomarkers for prognostic enrichment of time-to-event clinical trials.PloS one · 2020Article
- Biomarkers in Food Allergy.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2018Review
- Measuring differential treatment benefit across marker specific subgroups: The choice of outcome scale.Contemporary clinical trials · 2017Article
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
The current era of targeted treatment has accelerated the interest in studying gene-treatment, gene-gene, and gene-environment interactions using statistical models in the health sciences. Interactions are incorporated into models as product terms of risk factors. The statistical significance of interactions is traditionally examined using a likelihood ratio test (LRT). Epidemiological and clinical studies also evaluate interactions in order to understand the prognostic and predictive values of genetic factors. However, it is not clear how different types and magnitudes of interaction effects are related to prognostic and predictive values. The contribution of interaction to prognostic values can be examined via improvements in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve due to the inclusion of interaction terms in the model (ΔAUC). We develop a resampling based approach to test the significance of this improvement and show that it is equivalent to LRT. Predictive values provide insights into whether carriers of genetic factors benefit from specific treatment or preventive interventions relative to noncarriers, under some definition of treatment benefit. However, there is no unique definition of the term treatment benefit. We show that ΔAUC and relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) measure predictive values under two specific definitions of treatment benefit. We investigate the properties of LRT, ΔAUC, and RERI using simulations. We illustrate these approaches using published melanoma data to understand the benefits of possible intervention on sun exposure in relation to the MC1R gene. The goal is to evaluate possible interventions on sun exposure in relation to MC1R.
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.