ArticleBMC medical research methodology2018
Using an onset-anchored Bayesian hierarchical model to improve predictions for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis disease progression.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2018. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modeling and Bioinformatics Identify Responders to G-CSF in Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Using automated electronic medical record data extraction to model ALS survival and progression.BMC neurology · 2018Article
- Using an Anchor to Improve Linear Predictions with Application to Predicting Disease Progression.Revista Colombiana de estadisticaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, is a rare disease with extreme between-subject variability, especially with respect to rate of disease progression. This makes modelling a subject's disease progression, which is measured by the ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS), very difficult. Consider the problem of predicting a subject's ALSFRS score at 9 or 12 months after a given time-point.
methodsWe obtained ALS subject data from the Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials Database, a collection of data from various ALS clinical trials. Due to the typical linearity of the ALSFRS, we consider several Bayesian hierarchical linear models. These include a mixture model (to account for the two potential classes of "fast" and "slow" ALS progressors) as well as an onset-anchored model, in which an additional artificial data-point, using time of disease onset, is utilized to improve predictive performance.
resultsThe onset-anchored model had a drastically reduced posterior predictive mean-square-error distributions, when compared to the Bayesian hierarchical linear model or the mixture model under a cross-validation approach. No covariates, other than time of disease onset, consistently improved predictive performance in either the Bayesian hierarchical linear model or the onset-anchored model.
conclusionsAugmenting patient data with an additional artificial data-point, or onset anchor, can drastically improve predictive modelling in ALS by reducing the variability of estimated parameters at the cost of a slight increase in bias. This onset-anchored model is extremely useful if predictions are desired directly after a single baseline measure (such as at the first day of a clinical trial), a feat that would be very difficult without the onset-anchor. This approach could be useful in modelling other diseases that have bounded progression scales (e.g. Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, or inclusion-body myositis). It is our hope that this model can be used by clinicians and statisticians to improve the efficacy of clinical trials and aid in finding treatments for ALS.
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.