Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27444890›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016

Boosting the discriminatory power of sparse survival models via optimization of the concordance index and stability selection.

Andreas Mayr, Benjamin Hofner, Matthias Schmid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Probing for Sparse and Fast Variable Selection with Model-Based Boosting.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2017
    Article
  15. An Update on Statistical Boosting in Biomedicine.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2017
    Review
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

3 authors.

Andreas MayrInstitut für Medizininformatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Waldstr. 6, Erlangen, 91054, Germany. andreas.mayr@fau.de.
Benjamin HofnerInstitut für Medizininformatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Waldstr. 6, Erlangen, 91054, Germany.
Matthias SchmidInstitut für Medizinische Biometrie, Informatik und Epidemiologie, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, Bonn, 53105, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen constructing new biomarker or gene signature scores for time-to-event outcomes, the underlying aims are to develop a discrimination model that helps to predict whether patients have a poor or good prognosis and to identify the most influential variables for this task. In practice, this is often done fitting Cox models. Those are, however, not necessarily optimal with respect to the resulting discriminatory power and are based on restrictive assumptions. We present a combined approach to automatically select and fit sparse discrimination models for potentially high-dimensional survival data based on boosting a smooth version of the concordance index (C-index). Due to this objective function, the resulting prediction models are optimal with respect to their ability to discriminate between patients with longer and shorter survival times. The gradient boosting algorithm is combined with the stability selection approach to enhance and control its variable selection properties.

resultsThe resulting algorithm fits prediction models based on the rankings of the survival times and automatically selects only the most stable predictors. The performance of the approach, which works best for small numbers of informative predictors, is demonstrated in a large scale simulation study: C-index boosting in combination with stability selection is able to identify a small subset of informative predictors from a much larger set of non-informative ones while controlling the per-family error rate. In an application to discover biomarkers for breast cancer patients based on gene expression data, stability selection yielded sparser models and the resulting discriminatory power was higher than with lasso penalized Cox regression models.

conclusionThe combination of stability selection and C-index boosting can be used to select small numbers of informative biomarkers and to derive new prediction rules that are optimal with respect to their discriminatory power. Stability selection controls the per-family error rate which makes the new approach also appealing from an inferential point of view, as it provides an alternative to classical hypothesis tests for single predictor effects. Due to the shrinkage and variable selection properties of statistical boosting algorithms, the latter tests are typically unfeasible for prediction models fitted by boosting.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAlgorithmsBiomarkersBreast NeoplasmsDiscriminant AnalysisFemaleHumansNeoplasm MetastasisPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsSurvival AnalysisTranscriptomeBiomarkersBoostingConcordance indexHigh-dimensional dataStability selectionTime-to-event dataVariable selection

Identifiers

PMID27444890
PMCPMC4957316

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.