Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26646831›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2015

Subgroup identification for treatment selection in biomarker adaptive design.

Tzu-Pin Lu, James J Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. [Subgroup identification based on the Logistic model].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Tzu-Pin LuDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, HFT-20, Jefferson, AR, 72079, USA. tplu@ntu.edu.tw.
James J ChenDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, HFT-20, Jefferson, AR, 72079, USA. jamesj.chen@fda.hhs.gov.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in molecular technology have shifted new drug development toward targeted therapy for treatments expected to benefit subpopulations of patients. Adaptive signature design (ASD) has been proposed to identify the most suitable target patient subgroup to enhance efficacy of treatment effect. There are two essential aspects in the development of biomarker adaptive designs: 1) an accurate classifier to identify the most appropriate treatment for patients, and 2) statistical tests to detect treatment effect in the relevant population and subpopulations. We propose utilization of classification methods to identity patient subgroups and present a statistical testing strategy to detect treatment effects.

methodsThe diagonal linear discriminant analysis (DLDA) is used to identify targeted and non-targeted subgroups. For binary endpoints, DLDA is directly applied to classify patient into two subgroups; for continuous endpoints, a two-step procedure involving model fitting and determination of a cutoff-point is used for subgroup classification. The proposed strategy includes tests for treatment effect in all patients and in a marker-positive subgroup, with a possible follow-up estimation of treatment effect in the marker-negative subgroup. The proposed method is compared to the ASD classification method using simulated datasets and two publically available cancer datasets.

resultsThe DLDA-based classifier performs well in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy in the simulation data and the two cancer datasets, with superior accuracy compared to the ASD method. The subgroup testing strategy is shown to be useful in detecting treatment effect in terms of power and control of study-wise error.

conclusionAccuracy of a classifier is essential for adaptive designs. A poor classifier not only assigns patients to inappropriate treatments, but also reduces the power of the test, resulting in incorrect conclusions. The proposed procedure provides an effective approach for subgroup identification and subgroup analysis.

Indexed as

Research DesignAdenocarcinomaAdenocarcinoma of LungAlgorithmsBiomarkers, TumorComputer SimulationDisease-Free SurvivalEndpoint DeterminationHumansLung NeoplasmsModels, StatisticalPatient SelectionPrecision MedicineBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID26646831
PMCPMC4673750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.