ArticleStatistics in medicine2019
Estimation of the distribution of longitudinal biomarker trajectories prior to disease progression.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Dynamic Trajectories of Time-Series Data and Life-Threatening Mass Effect in Large Middle Cerebral Artery Stroke.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Dynamic trajectories of life-threatening mass effect in patients with large middle cerebral artery stroke.Research square · 2023Article
- Evaluating clinical heterogeneity and predicting mortality in severely burned patients through unsupervised clustering and latent class analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Longitudinal profile of routine biomarkers for mortality prediction using unsupervised clustering algorithm in severely burned patients: a retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Article
- Trajectories of longitudinal biomarkers for mortality in severely burned patients.Scientific reports · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Most studies characterize longitudinal biomarker trajectories by looking forward at them from a commonly used time origin, such as the initial treatment time. For a better understanding of the relationship between biomarkers and disease progression, we propose to align all subjects by using their disease progression time as the origin and then looking backward at the biomarker distributions prior to that event. We demonstrate that such backward-looking plots are much more informative than forward-looking plots when the research goal is to understand the shape of the trajectory leading up to the event of interest. Such backward-looking plotting is an easy task if disease progression is observed for all the subjects. However, when these events are censored for a significant proportion of subjects in the study cohort, their time origins cannot be identified, and the task of aligning them cannot be performed. We propose a new method to tackle this problem by considering the distributions of longitudinal biomarker data conditional on the failure time. We use landmark analysis models to estimate these distributions. Compared to a naïve method, our new method greatly reduces estimation bias. We apply our method to a study for chronic myeloid leukemia patients whose BCR-ABL transcript expression levels after treatment are good indicators of residual disease. Our proposed method provides a good visualization tool for longitudinal biomarker studies for the early detection of disease.
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.