Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28818434›Full record

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.

Holly Janes, Marshall D Brown, Michael R Crager, Dave P Miller, William E Barlow

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Holly JanesFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North M2-C200, Seattle, WA 98109, United States; Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, F-600 Health Sciences Building, Box 357232, Seattle, WA 98195, United States. Electronic address: hjanes@fredhutch.org.
Marshall D BrownFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North M2-C200, Seattle, WA 98109, United States. Electronic address: mdbrown@fredhutch.org.
Michael R CragerGenomic Health Incorporated, 310 Penobscot Drive, Redwood City, CA 94063, United States.
Dave P MillerGenomic Health Incorporated, 310 Penobscot Drive, Redwood City, CA 94063, United States.
William E BarlowCancer Research and Biostatistics, 1730 Minor Avenue #1900, Seattle, WA 98101, United States. Electronic address: williamb@crab.org.
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · USGenomic Health (United States) · USCancer Research And Biostatistics · US

Funding

SWOG Statistics & Data Management Center complex - extension supplement for GY06U10CA180819 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Catherine M. Tangen · 2014 to 2026
$115.2M
Statistical Methods for Evaluating Markers for Treatment SelectionR01CA152089 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI JANES, HOLLY · 2010 to 2021
$3.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA152089NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180819
6 · The paper itself

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

Models, StatisticalAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkersBreast NeoplasmsChemotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalReceptors, EstrogenTamoxifenBiomarkersReceptors, EstrogenTamoxifenBiomarkerBreast cancerInteractionPredictive biomarkerPrognostic biomarkerTreatment selection biomarker

Identifiers

PMID28818434
PMCPMC5696084
OpenAlexW2748073206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.