Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2017
Adjusting for covariates in evaluating markers for selecting treatment, with application to guiding chemotherapy for treating estrogen-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer.
Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a predictive signature for two trial endpoints using the cross-validated risk scores method.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Innovative trial approaches in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: current use and future potential.BMC rheumatology · 2021Article
- 21-Gene Recurrence Score and Adjuvant Chemotherapy Decision for Breast Cancer Patients with Positive Lymph Nodes.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In many clinical contexts, biomarkers that predict treatment efficacy are highly sought after. Such treatment selection or predictive biomarkers have the potential to identify subgroups most likely to benefit from the treatment, and may therefore be used to improve clinical outcomes and reduce medical costs. A methodological challenge in evaluating these biomarkers is determining how to take into account other variables that predict clinical outcomes, or that influence the biomarker distribution, generically termed covariates. We distinguish between two questions that arise when evaluating markers in the context of covariates. First, what is the biomarker's added value for selecting treatment, over and above the covariates? Second, what is the marker's performance within covariate strata-does performance vary? We lay out statistical methodology for addressing each of these questions. We argue that the common approach of testing for the marker's statistical interaction with treatment, in the context of a multivariate model that includes the covariates as predictors, does not directly address either question. We illustrate the methodology in new analyses of the Oncotype DX Recurrence Score, a marker used to select adjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer.
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.